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.
SEZL · Technology · 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%.
| Measure | ADI | LOGI | SEZL | NOVT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 84 (highest) | 51 | 80 | 69 |
| Pricing power | 97 (highest) | 63 | — | 73 |
| Returns on capital | 34 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 18 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 56 | 100 (highest) | 54 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 60 | 20 | 32 | 73 (highest) |
| Price vs. high estimate | 171% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data | 5846% above high estimate | 188% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $182.1B | Not reported | $5.2B | $5.0B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |