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.
LBRDA · Communications · Shallow moat
On the watchlist
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 | LBRDA | ATEX | EVC | ROKU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 40 | 41 (highest) | 40 | 40 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 85 (highest) | 75 | 45 | 78 |
| Pricing power | — | 0 | 76 (highest) | 64 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 4 | 7 (highest) | 4 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 28 | 100 (highest) | 28 | 28 |
| Capital discipline | 48 (highest) | 24 | 45 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 55% below high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $4.3B | $1.9B | $1.0B | $21.3B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |