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.
GDDY · 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%.
| Measure | GDDY | ACIW | MMS | NTNX |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 60 (highest) | 60 (highest) | 60 (highest) | 60 (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 | 88 (highest) | 71 | 85 |
| Pricing power | — | 84 | 38 | 91 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 46 | 8 | 72 (highest) | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 39 | 44 | 39 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 100 (highest) | 77 | 81 | 24 |
| 33% above value if growth stopped today | 90% above value if growth stopped today | Around the value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | |
| Market cap | $14.3B | $5.4B | $3.4B | Not reported |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 |