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.
AGIG · 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 | ITP | OKMN | CLW | AGIG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 14 | 16 (highest) | 16 (highest) | 13 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 20 | 27 | 34 (highest) | 0 |
| Pricing power | 0 (highest) | 0 (highest) | 0 (highest) | — |
| Returns on capital | 0 (highest) | 0 (highest) | 0 (highest) | 0 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 50 (highest) | 28 | 0 | 28 |
| Capital allocation | 0 | 24 | 44 (highest) | 24 |
| No price data | No price data | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | $1.7M | $8.3M | Not reported | $36.5M |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filing date | FY2024 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |