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.
APAM · Other · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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 | HLI | WT | SEIC | APAM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 76 | 81 (highest) | 79 | 75 |
| 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 | 95 (highest) | 84 | 39 |
| Pricing power | 46 | 100 (highest) | 53 | — |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 93 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 37 | 73 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 80 | 81 | 84 (highest) | 63 |
| No price data | 261% above value if growth stopped today | 100% above value if growth stopped today | 7% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | Not reported | $2.7B | $12.1B | $3.2B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Wide moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |