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.
EVRG · Utilities · 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%.
| Measure | CNP | KGS | EVRG | SWX |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 35 (highest) | 35 (highest) | 35 (highest) | 34 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 41 | 60 (highest) | 56 | 60 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 78 (highest) | 65 | — | 0 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 10 (highest) | 8 | 2 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 1 | 40 | 1 | 50 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 54 | 0 | 75 (highest) | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 149% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 467% above high estimate | No price data | 204% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $29.1B | $5.1B | Not reported | $6.7B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |