The Moat Index
Compare moats, side by side.
Two to four companies, scored on the same five investor questions from their SEC filings — so the comparison is apples to apples. The method is fully public.
ACEL · Communications · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
The pricingPower component abstained: Not enough years of gross-margin data to score pricing power. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
FULO · Communications · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | ACEL | FULO | KUBR | IDT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 71 | 75 (highest) | 73 | 71 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 90 (highest) | 85 | 60 | 73 |
| Pricing power | — | 92 (highest) | 70 | 22 |
| Returns on capital | 62 | — | 100 (highest) | 95 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 60 | 24 | 36 | 65 (highest) |
| No price data | 14% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | 176% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | Not reported | $6.5M | Not reported | $2.0B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2023 | FY2024 | FY2026 |