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.
PYPL · Technology · Wide moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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 | FDS | SPSC | PYPL | OLED |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 87 (highest) | 87 (highest) | 87 (highest) | 86 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 89 | 77 |
| Pricing power | 90 | 100 (highest) | — | 99 |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 54 | 77 | 77 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 68 | 100 (highest) | 81 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 76 | 80 | 100 (highest) | 79 |
| 99% above value if growth stopped today | 345% above value if growth stopped today | 5% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 59% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $11.4B | $3.3B | $52.6B | $3.7B |
| Moat tier | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |