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.
DJCO · 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%.
| Measure | LZB | DJCO | MH | VMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 64 | 65 (highest) | 65 (highest) | 64 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 30 | 100 (highest) | 72 | 94 |
| Pricing power | 69 | — | 100 (highest) | 42 |
| Returns on capital | 89 (highest) | 0 | 22 | 64 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 100 (highest) | 50 | 39 |
| Capital allocation | 61 | 60 | 80 | 82 (highest) |
| 10% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 32% above value if growth stopped today | 19% above value if growth stopped today | 218% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $1.2B | $1.2B | $2.7B | $33.0B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 |