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.
CHH · Consumer Discretionary · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | CHH | LOW | URBN | MUSA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 74 | 76 (highest) | 75 | 74 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 83 | 80 | 85 (highest) | 63 |
| Pricing power | — | 58 | 50 | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 80 | 100 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 12 | 57 | 73 (highest) | 36 |
| Capital discipline | 100 (highest) | 84 | 89 | 68 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 6% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 48% above high estimate | 20% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | $5.1B | $114.9B | $6.7B | — |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2026 | FY2025 |