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.
EOG · 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%.
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 | EOG | SHOO | CHD | DJCO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 66 | 67 (highest) | 66 | 65 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 62 | 51 | 54 | 100 (highest) |
| Pricing power | — | 68 | 77 (highest) | — |
| Returns on capital | 64 | 93 (highest) | 69 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 94 | 85 | 60 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 40 | 72 (highest) | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 59% above high estimate | 175% above high estimate | 19% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) |
| Market cap | Not reported | $3.1B | $23.1B | $1.0B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |