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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

BZFD · Communications · No moat

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%.

LLYVA · Communications · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Only one aligned fiscal year of revenue and diluted EPS is available; a trend needs at least two observations. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

AMC · Communications · No moat

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%.

PUSA · Communications · No moat

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%.

MeasureBZFDLLYVAAMCPUSA
Moat Score (0–100)2324 (highest)2323
Methodology versionmoat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0
Business trend2050 (highest)22
Pricing power23
Returns on capital00018 (highest)
Balance-sheet safety28 (highest)28 (highest)028 (highest)
Capital discipline44 (highest)44 (highest)44 (highest)24
Price vs. high estimateNo price dataNo price dataNo price data4384% above high estimate
Market cap$48.8M$9.0B$1.5B$53.3M
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025