VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Stock Comparison

Intertek Group plc vs Waste Management, Inc.

Compare moat strength, market structure, and segment coverage to understand how each company defends its edge.

Intertek Group plc

ITRK · London Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryGB
Data as of2025-12-28
Moat score
64/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Intertek Group plc's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View ITRK analysis

Waste Management, Inc.

WM · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
79/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Waste Management, Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View WM analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Waste Management, Inc. leads (79 / 100 vs 64 / 100 for Intertek Group plc).
  • Segment focus: Intertek Group plc has 5 segments (28.3% in Consumer Products); Waste Management, Inc. has 4 segments (82.2% in Collection and Disposal).
  • Moat breadth: Intertek Group plc has 6 moat types across 3 domains; Waste Management, Inc. has 7 across 3.

Primary market context

Intertek Group plc

Consumer Products

Market

Consumer products testing, inspection and certification (TIC/ATIC) services

Geography

Global

Customer

Brands, retailers, manufacturers

Role

Third-party conformity assessment and supply chain QA

Revenue share

28.3%

Waste Management, Inc.

Collection and Disposal

Market

Municipal, commercial, and industrial solid waste collection, transfer, and landfill disposal

Geography

North America (primarily US and Canada)

Customer

Municipalities and end-customers (residential, commercial, industrial) via direct and contract channels

Role

Integrated hauler + transfer + landfill owner/operator

Revenue share

82.2%

Side-by-side metrics

Intertek Group plc
Waste Management, Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
ITRK - London Stock Exchange
WM - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Industrials
Industrials
HQ country
GB
US
Primary segment
Consumer Products
Collection and Disposal
Market structure
Oligopoly
Oligopoly
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Strong
Strong
Moat score
64 / 100
79 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Demand, Legal
Legal, Supply, Demand
Last update
2025-12-28
2025-12-31

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

No overlap yet.

Intertek Group plc strengths

Service Field NetworkData Workflow LockinBrand TrustCompliance AdvantageSuite BundlingDesign In Qualification

Waste Management, Inc. strengths

Permits Rights Of WayCapacity MoatPricing power via yield management and contracted rate actionsOperational ExcellencePreferential Input AccessRegulated Standards PipePhysical Network Density

Segment mix

Intertek Group plc segments

Full profile >

Consumer Products

Oligopoly

28.3%

Corporate Assurance

Competitive

14.6%

Health and Safety

Competitive

9.9%

Industry and Infrastructure

Competitive

24.9%

World of Energy

Oligopoly

22.3%

Waste Management, Inc. segments

Full profile >

Collection and Disposal

Oligopoly

82.2%

Recycling Processing and Sales

Competitive

6%

WM Renewable Energy

Competitive

1.7%

WM Healthcare Solutions

Oligopoly

10%

Want the full wide moat stocks list?

Browse the full ranking of wide moat stocks, updated with moat scores and segment context.

View the moat stocks list

Curation & Accuracy

This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).

Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.