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.
GRDN · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
SPWH · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
LINC · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
| Measure | GRDN | SPWH | LINC | TSLA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 50 (highest) | 50 (highest) | 50 (highest) | 50 (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 | — | 46 | 33 | 79 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 38 | 56 | 91 (highest) | 22 |
| Returns on capital | 18 | 82 (highest) | 42 | 21 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 0 | 45 | 82 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 64 (highest) | 38 | 44 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | No price data | 485% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 986% above high estimate |
| Market cap | — | $43.5M | $1.3B | $1.39T |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |