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.
IMXI · Technology · 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 | IMXI | AVGO | LDOS | IBTA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 71 | 72 (highest) | 71 | 71 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 59 | 95 (highest) | 82 | 72 |
| Pricing power | — | 86 | 22 | 97 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 90 (highest) | 69 | 74 | 88 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 57 | 49 | 80 (highest) | 55 |
| Capital allocation | 80 | 60 | 100 (highest) | 44 |
| 39% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 972% above value if growth stopped today | 31% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | |
| Market cap | $387M | $1.81T | $14.2B | Not reported |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |