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.
HSTM · Technology · 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%.
| Measure | CRM | HSTM | ZM | PLAB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 69 (highest) | 69 (highest) | 69 (highest) | 69 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 95 (highest) | 84 | 80 | 93 |
| Pricing power | 100 (highest) | — | 98 | 21 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 0 | 24 | 46 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 90 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 60 | 94 (highest) | 44 | 83 |
| 342% above value if growth stopped today | 44% above value if growth stopped today | 143% above value if growth stopped today | 20% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | $221.0B | $865M | $27.3B | $1.7B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 |