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.
ANKM · Technology · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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%.
CCLD · Technology · Shallow 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 | ANKM | UPBD | CCLD | OKTA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 55 (highest) | 55 (highest) | 55 (highest) | 55 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 70 | 47 | 69 | 78 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 70 | 81 | — | 98 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | — | 93 (highest) | 7 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 | 28 | 99 (highest) | 73 |
| Capital discipline | 24 | 25 | 44 (highest) | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 55% above high estimate | 40% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data |
| Market cap | — | $1.3B | $96.3M | $26.6B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 |