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.
OPY · Other · 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%.
CG · Other · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
| Measure | NDAQ | OPY | HKHC | CG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 55 | 63 (highest) | 58 | 55 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 82 (highest) | 59 | 75 | 10 |
| Pricing power | 96 | — | 43 | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 16 | 28 (highest) | 11 | — |
| Balance-sheet safety | 19 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 48 |
| Capital discipline | 60 | 64 (highest) | 60 | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 159% above high estimate | 10% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data | 30% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $52.5B | $1.2B | $522M | $16.2B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Narrow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |