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.
ARTNA · Utilities · No 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 | ARTNA | CNP | KGS | SWX |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 35 | 36 (highest) | 35 | 35 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 76 (highest) | 49 | 60 | 62 |
| Pricing power | — | 78 (highest) | 65 | 0 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 0 | 10 (highest) | 2 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 3 | 1 | 40 | 50 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 61 (highest) | 54 | 0 | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 140% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 518% above high estimate | 200% above high estimate |
| Market cap | — | $28.1B | $5.5B | $6.6B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |