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.
SEZL · Technology · 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 | LOGI | DSNY | EGAN | SEZL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (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 | 51 | 39 | 76 | 80 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 63 | 99 (highest) | 97 | — |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 78 | 18 | 100 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 55 | 100 (highest) | 54 |
| Capital allocation | 20 | 64 (highest) | 44 | 32 |
| No price data | 37% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 592% above value if growth stopped today | 5846% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | Not reported | $5.1M | $174M | $5.2B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |