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.
CRK · Materials · 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%.
LEU · Materials · No moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | CRK | LEU | HGYN | SMG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 36 (highest) | 36 (highest) | 36 (highest) | 36 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 65 (highest) | 53 | 33 | 57 |
| Pricing power | — | 17 | 4 | 36 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 8 | — | 0 | 57 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 27 | 31 | 100 (highest) | 2 |
| Capital discipline | 44 (highest) | 44 (highest) | 44 (highest) | 28 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 61% above high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $3.8B | — | $2.1M | $4.0B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |