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.
FANG · Materials · 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 | IPI | RIG | FANG | ECVT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 31 (highest) | 31 (highest) | 31 (highest) | 31 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 52 | 60 (highest) | 50 | 44 |
| Pricing power | 5 | 44 (highest) | — | 40 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 0 | 18 (highest) | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 (highest) | 28 | 32 | 36 |
| Capital allocation | 24 | 24 | 24 | 34 (highest) |
| No price data | No price data | 67% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 362% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $449M | $5.9B | $58.3B | $1.4B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |