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.
DJCO · Materials · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | DJCO | LPX | SNBRQ | TPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 61 | 62 (highest) | 62 (highest) | 61 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 85 (highest) | 65 | 50 | 48 |
| Pricing power | — | 18 | 100 (highest) | 98 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 93 | 96 | 97 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 79 | 0 | 24 |
| Capital discipline | 60 | 57 | 64 (highest) | 40 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 24% above high estimate | 7% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data | 182% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $1.1B | $5.0B | — | $29.4B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |