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.
LIN · Materials · Narrow 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 | LIN | CHD | TGLS | PNRG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 73 (highest) | 73 (highest) | 73 (highest) | 72 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 96 (highest) | 88 | 91 | 69 |
| Pricing power | — | 77 | 53 | 98 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 26 | 69 (highest) | 64 | 18 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 76 | 60 | 96 (highest) | 78 |
| Capital discipline | 94 | 72 | 60 | 100 (highest) |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 175% above high estimate | 28% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 2% below high estimate |
| Market cap | — | $23.1B | $2.1B | $305.7M |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |