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.
HOLO · Technology · Shallow 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%.
MTSI · Technology · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
AMBQ · Technology · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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%.
| Measure | HOLO | BL | MTSI | AMBQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 46 (highest) | 46 (highest) | 46 (highest) | 46 (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 | — | 77 (highest) | 54 | 41 |
| Pricing power | 67 | 100 (highest) | 79 | 44 |
| Returns on capital | 18 (highest) | 0 | 0 | — |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 | 29 | 72 (highest) | 55 |
| Capital discipline | 44 (highest) | 24 | 24 | 43 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 158% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 1419% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | — | $1.8B | $20.1B | $1.3B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2022 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |