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.
KBH · Industrials · 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 | KBH | TOL | EACO | WTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 80 | 81 (highest) | 80 | 79 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 75 | 89 | 96 (highest) | 77 |
| Pricing power | — | 33 | 49 | 68 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 66 | 81 (highest) | 74 | 66 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 78 | 100 (highest) | 99 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 80 | 86 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 67% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 43% below high estimate | 28% above high estimate | 130% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $3.5B | $13.9B | $491.0M | $11.4B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Wide moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |