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.
GTN · Communications · 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%.
ACBM · Communications · No moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The capitalDiscipline component abstained: Not enough owner-earnings history to score capital discipline. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
SALM · Communications · 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 | GTN | ACBM | GLTK | SALM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 15 | 16 (highest) | 15 | 15 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 43 (highest) | 0 | 20 | 31 |
| Pricing power | — | 1 (highest) | 0 | — |
| Returns on capital | 17 (highest) | 6 | 0 | 4 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 0 | 55 (highest) | 28 | 0 |
| Capital allocation | 0 | — | 28 (highest) | 26 |
| No price data | No price data | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | Not reported | $1.6M | $256M | $26.1M |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2022 |