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.
INVU · 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%.
DASH · 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%.
| Measure | EBAY | NTCT | INVU | DASH |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 58 (highest) | 58 (highest) | 58 (highest) | 58 (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 | 38 | 65 | 27 | 80 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 99 (highest) | 99 (highest) | 86 | — |
| Returns on capital | 65 (highest) | 0 | — | 6 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 46 | 73 | 55 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 40 | 52 | 62 (highest) | 44 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 118% above high estimate | 98% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 661% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | $49.1B | $2.9B | $47.9M | $76.0B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |