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.
GLIBA · Communications · No moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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%.
CABO · Communications · No moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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 | LUMN | GLIBA | HMMR | CABO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 26 | 27 (highest) | 26 | 26 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 5 | 36 (highest) | 27 | 27 |
| Pricing power | 82 (highest) | — | 26 | — |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 0 | 28 | 55 (highest) | 0 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 44 | 24 | 47 (highest) |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data | 91% below high estimate |
| Market cap | $6.5B | $692M | $7.6M | $212M |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |