Exposed geomembrane covers (EGMs) are considered as suitable alternatives to traditional subtitle D soil covers with compacted clay layers (CCL) for landfill cover applications. Compared to CCLs, which comprise various layers, including vegetation, erosion soil layers, and barrier liners, EGMs offer benefits such as reduced resource use. There are several risks associated with cover systems, ranging from climate-related shocks or stressors such as earthquakes, droughts, and floods to local shocks such as excessive differential settlement due to the uneven degradation of waste mass. Hence, their resilience and sustainability must be analyzed, particularly considering the escalating impact of climate change and the growing need to integrate resilience and sustainability principles into engineering designs and operations. This study comparatively assessed the resilience and sustainability of three cover systems: EGM, soil cover with geomembranes, and soil cover without geomembranes. A ((tiered quantitative life cycle assessment of sustainability and resilience) framework was employed. The resilience assessment was performed using a rating system, considering the technical performance of the cover systems, along with the environmental, economic, and social implications of the failures. Subsequently, a comprehensive sustainability assessment encompassing environmental, economic, and social dimensions was conducted. A life-cycle assessment of all cover systems was performed to evaluate environmental sustainability, and a cost-benefit analysis was employed to compare their economic aspects. Social sustainability was evaluated using a rating system. The assessments were combined to develop an integrated sustainability and resiliency index. EGM was the most resilient and sustainable alternative for landfill cover systems compared to traditional soil covers. These insights enable an objective comparison of resilience and sustainability, facilitating informed decision-making.