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.
LTBR · Materials · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
TPET · Materials · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The capitalDiscipline component abstained: Not enough owner-earnings history to score capital discipline. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | LTBR | OEC | TPET | NBR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 42 (highest) | 42 (highest) | 42 (highest) | 42 (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 | — | 38 | 70 | 80 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 68 | 37 | 70 (highest) | 60 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 40 (highest) | 0 | 7 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 (highest) | 40 | 28 | 36 |
| Capital allocation | 44 | 55 (highest) | — | 24 |
| No price data | 66% below value if growth stopped today | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | $251M | $393M | $2.7M | $1.3B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |