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.
ARKO · Consumer Discretionary · 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 | MXCT | ARKO | GTIM | CANN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 37 | 38 (highest) | 38 (highest) | 37 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 19 | 32 | 42 | 70 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 89 (highest) | — | 23 | 65 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 35 (highest) | 4 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 (highest) | 20 | 55 (highest) | 28 |
| Capital allocation | 24 | 64 (highest) | 64 (highest) | 24 |
| No price data | 56% above value if growth stopped today | 43% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | |
| Market cap | $115M | $879M | $14.7M | $2.8M |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2023 |