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%.
PPG · Materials · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
RPM · Materials · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | LIN | PPG | RPM | CSW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 70 | 72 (highest) | 71 | 70 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 85 | 50 | 84 | 95 (highest) |
| Pricing power | — | 68 | 64 | 75 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 26 | 92 (highest) | — | 56 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 76 (highest) | — | 46 | 50 |
| Capital discipline | 94 (highest) | 79 | 89 | 75 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 27% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 29% above high estimate | 113% above high estimate |
| Market cap | Not reported | $25.9B | $13.7B | $4.7B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2026 |