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.
EUBG · Consumer Discretionary · 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%.
ODC · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
RUSHA · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
| Measure | EUBG | MLR | ODC | RUSHA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 24 | 85 | 62 | 86 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 91 (highest) | 17 | 34 | 31 |
| Returns on capital | — | 71 (highest) | 49 | 47 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 78 | 73 | 69 |
| Capital discipline | 20 | 45 | 76 (highest) | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 359% above high estimate | 112% above high estimate | No price data | 10% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) |
| Market cap | $75.8M | $564.2M | — | $6.0B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |