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.
EXP · Materials · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | CVCO | SCCO | NOBH | EXP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 76 | 78 (highest) | 78 (highest) | 75 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 73 | 65 | 78 | 90 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 36 | 67 (highest) | 40 | 43 |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 95 | 100 (highest) | 84 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 96 | 100 (highest) | — |
| Capital allocation | 100 (highest) | 68 | 72 | 82 |
| 85% above value if growth stopped today | 337% above value if growth stopped today | 5% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | Around the value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $3.9B | $164.4B | $89.5M | $5.1B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 |