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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

MLKN · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

FUL · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MP · Materials · No moat

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%.

BLGO · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Only one aligned fiscal year of revenue and diluted EPS is available; a trend needs at least two observations. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MeasureMLKNFULMPBLGO
Moat Score (0–100)3233 (highest)33 (highest)32
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend54 (highest)4420
Pricing power634668 (highest)
Returns on capital18 (highest)7120
Balance-sheet safety1255 (highest)28
Capital allocation163444 (highest)34
19% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today)44% above value if growth stopped today2612% above value if growth stopped todayNo price data
Market cap$1.5B$3.0B$7.3BNot reported
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2026FY2025FY2025FY2025