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.
MATX · Industrials · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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 | MATX | LECO | FIX | AYI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 78 (highest) | 78 (highest) | 78 (highest) | 77 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 76 | 72 | 94 (highest) | 87 |
| Pricing power | — | 59 | 31 | 70 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 40 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 98 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 95 (highest) | 64 | 73 | 74 |
| Capital discipline | 100 (highest) | 94 | 91 | 56 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 23% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 56% above high estimate | 935% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | $6.6B | $13.5B | $60.2B | — |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |