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.
LGL · Technology · Shallow 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%.
PNXP · Technology · 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%.
| Measure | LGL | SABR | PNXP | VRNS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 48 (highest) | 48 (highest) | 48 (highest) | 48 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 47 | 60 (highest) | 20 | 60 (highest) |
| Pricing power | — | 75 | 91 | 99 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 9 | 13 (highest) | — | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 40 | 55 | 55 |
| Capital discipline | 34 | 51 (highest) | 24 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 762% above high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $41.4M | $679.4M | — | $5.6B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |