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.
GRND · Technology · 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%.
LZ · Technology · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | EPAM | SPGI | GRND | LZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 76 | 77 (highest) | 77 (highest) | 76 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 60 | 78 | 85 (highest) | 74 |
| Pricing power | 54 | 100 (highest) | — | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 77 | 93 | — |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 73 | 69 | 71 |
| Capital discipline | 68 (highest) | 56 | 60 | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 44% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 70% above high estimate | 552% above high estimate | 408% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $4.9B | $127.4B | $2.7B | $1.3B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |