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.

CMCSA · Communications · Shallow moat

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%.

CALX · Communications · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

WMG · Communications · Shallow moat

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%.

CPHC · Communications · Shallow moat

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%.

MeasureCMCSACALXWMGCPHC
Moat Score (0–100)55 (highest)55 (highest)55 (highest)55 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0
Business trend93 (highest)7439
Pricing power7280 (highest)
Returns on capital20757 (highest)56
Balance-sheet safety28100 (highest)14100 (highest)
Capital discipline79 (highest)246924
Price vs. high estimateNo price data690% above high estimateNo price data3% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate)
Market cap$2.6B$81.1M
Moat tierShallow moatShallow moatShallow moatShallow moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025