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.
ACEL · Communications · 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%.
RSI · Communications · 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%.
OSW · Communications · 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 | GLXZ | ACEL | RSI | OSW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 69 | 71 (highest) | 70 | 67 |
| 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 | 90 (highest) | 80 | 80 |
| Pricing power | 100 (highest) | — | 54 | — |
| Returns on capital | 97 (highest) | 62 | — | 39 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 13 | 73 | 100 (highest) | 77 |
| Capital allocation | 77 (highest) | 60 | 44 | 73 |
| 330% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | $41.6M | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |