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.
MAR · Consumer Discretionary · 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%.
CSV · Consumer Discretionary · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
| Measure | LRN | MAR | CSV | FSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 72 (highest) | 72 (highest) | 72 (highest) | 72 (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 | 100 (highest) | 95 | 80 | 100 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 59 (highest) | — | 51 | 43 |
| Returns on capital | 39 | 78 | 90 (highest) | 56 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 15 | 58 | 84 |
| Capital allocation | 61 | 100 (highest) | 80 | 76 |
| 46% above value if growth stopped today | 277% above value if growth stopped today | 39% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 248% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $3.8B | $99.5B | $614M | $7.2B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |