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.
DFIN · Technology · 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%.
AISP · Technology · 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%.
| Measure | DFIN | AISP | LAWIL | NCMI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 50 (highest) | 50 (highest) | 50 (highest) | 50 (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 | 20 | 48 | 63 (highest) | 60 |
| Pricing power | — | 73 | 88 | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 72 (highest) | — | 4 | 14 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 67 (highest) | 55 | 0 | 55 |
| Capital discipline | 40 | 24 | 95 (highest) | 20 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 20% above high estimate | 22% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data | 227% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $1.2B | $69.1M | Not reported | $352M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |