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.
CME · Other · 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%.
APAM · Other · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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%.
GCMG · Other · 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 | CME | HLI | APAM | GCMG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 75 | 76 (highest) | 75 | 72 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 97 (highest) | 56 | 39 | 72 |
| Pricing power | — | 46 | — | — |
| Returns on capital | 24 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 88 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 46 |
| Capital discipline | 77 | 80 (highest) | 63 | 80 (highest) |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | No price data | 34% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 846% above high estimate |
| Market cap | Not reported | Not reported | $3.2B | $2.4B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |