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.
AM · Utilities · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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 | AM | PCYO | PEG | NFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 51 | 52 (highest) | 52 (highest) | 50 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 98 (highest) | 72 | 54 | 55 |
| Pricing power | — | 51 | 100 (highest) | 96 |
| Returns on capital | 11 | 0 | 3 | 34 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 51 | 95 (highest) | 30 | 33 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 41 | 72 (highest) | 32 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 133% above high estimate | 95% above high estimate | 84% above high estimate | 38% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) |
| Market cap | $10.7B | $256.3M | $38.8B | $7.3B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |