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.
MGY · 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 | MGY | NOBH | USLM | WWW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 77 (highest) | 77 (highest) | 77 (highest) | 75 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 75 | 72 | 89 (highest) | 59 |
| Pricing power | — | 40 | 23 | 66 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 88 | 100 (highest) | 97 | 86 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 98 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 45 | 72 | 74 (highest) | 66 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 10% above high estimate | 36% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 124% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | $4.7B | $97.6M | $3.0B | — |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |