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.
ATDS · 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%.
LGL · Technology · 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 | ATDS | LGL | RBA | GTLB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 52 (highest) | 52 (highest) | 52 (highest) | 52 (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 | 57 | 65 | 95 (highest) | 60 |
| Pricing power | 79 | — | 32 | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | — | 9 | 41 (highest) | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 28 | 100 (highest) | 32 | 55 |
| Capital allocation | 44 | 34 | 60 (highest) | 44 |
| No price data | 770% above value if growth stopped today | 385% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | |
| Market cap | $109357 | $41.7M | $20.7B | $5.2B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 |