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.
CHDN · Communications · 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%.
TKO · Communications · 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%.
TDS · Communications · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
| Measure | CHDN | TKO | KVHI | TDS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 43 | 44 (highest) | 44 (highest) | 43 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 91 (highest) | 85 | 39 | 26 |
| Pricing power | — | — | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 14 | 40 (highest) | 0 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 1 | 30 | 55 (highest) | 51 |
| Capital discipline | 67 (highest) | 20 | 24 | 37 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 26% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 1533% above high estimate | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $5.8B | $35.5B | $175.0M | $3.8B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |