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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

HE · Utilities · No moat

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%.

CDZI · Utilities · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Only one aligned fiscal year of revenue and diluted EPS is available; a trend needs at least two observations. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

PESI · Utilities · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

SNRG · Utilities · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MeasureHECDZIPESISNRG
Moat Score (0–100)1516 (highest)16 (highest)11
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend45 (highest)2720
Pricing power14 (highest)20
Returns on capital5 (highest)000
Balance-sheet safety928 (highest)28 (highest)
Capital allocation024 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)
4% above value if growth stopped todayNo price dataNo price dataNo price data
Market cap$2.3B$263M$296M$3M
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025