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.

CHEV · Industrials · No moat

No 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%.

VATE · Industrials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

NNBR · Industrials · 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%.

AQMS · Industrials · 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%.

MeasureCHEVVATENNBRAQMS
Moat Score (0–100)1314 (highest)1313
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend37 (highest)29
Pricing power08 (highest)0
Returns on capital0 (highest)0 (highest)0 (highest)0 (highest)
Balance-sheet safety28 (highest)0028 (highest)
Capital allocation24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)
No price dataNo price dataNo price dataNo price data
Market cap$11.2M$114M$177M$8.1M
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025