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.
AIXN · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
ONEW · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | LEA | AIXN | MDLK | ONEW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 41 (highest) | 41 (highest) | 41 (highest) | 41 (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 | 69 | 20 | 70 (highest) | — |
| Pricing power | 6 | 74 (highest) | 70 | 35 |
| Returns on capital | 39 | — | 0 | 58 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 52 (highest) | 28 | 28 | 28 |
| Capital discipline | 40 | 44 (highest) | 40 | 44 (highest) |
| Price vs. high estimate | 16% below high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $7.3B | $6.5M | $1.6M | Not reported |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |