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.
HTLD · Industrials · 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%.
NPK · Industrials · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | CENT | RLGT | HTLD | NPK |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 46 (highest) | 46 (highest) | 46 (highest) | 45 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 39 | 20 | 45 (highest) | — |
| Pricing power | 53 (highest) | 42 | — | 25 |
| Returns on capital | 28 | 28 | 43 (highest) | 37 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 48 | 49 | 36 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 60 | 89 (highest) | 58 | 20 |
| 55% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 86% above value if growth stopped today | 84% above value if growth stopped today | 186% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $2.7B | $425M | $862M | $1.0B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |