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.
EVRG · Utilities · No 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%.
ARTNA · Utilities · No 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 | EVRG | ARTNA | KGS | CNP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 35 (highest) | 35 (highest) | 35 (highest) | 35 (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 | 56 | 77 (highest) | 60 | 41 |
| Pricing power | — | — | 65 | 78 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 8 | 0 | 10 (highest) | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 1 | 3 | 40 (highest) | 1 |
| Capital allocation | 75 (highest) | 61 | 0 | 54 |
| No price data | No price data | 467% above value if growth stopped today | 149% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | Not reported | Not reported | $5.1B | $29.1B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |