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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

DE · Industrials · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

CRTD · Industrials · Shallow moat

Shallow 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%.

ARCB · Industrials · Shallow moat

Shallow 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%.

FSTJ · Industrials · Shallow moat

Shallow 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%.

MeasureDECRTDARCBFSTJ
Moat Score (0–100)53 (highest)53 (highest)53 (highest)53 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend4170 (highest)2870 (highest)
Pricing power577093 (highest)
Returns on capital3132 (highest)
Balance-sheet safety2862 (highest)28
Capital discipline824489 (highest)19
Price vs. high estimate25% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate)No price data58% above high estimate2572% above high estimate
Market cap$169.9B$199M$3.4B$44M
Moat tierShallow moatShallow moatShallow moatShallow moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2022FY2025FY2025