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.

NUVB · Healthcare · 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%.

RLYB · Healthcare · 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%.

EQ · Healthcare · 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%.

GLUE · Healthcare · 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%.

MeasureNUVBRLYBEQGLUE
Moat Score (0–100)37 (highest)37 (highest)37 (highest)37 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0
Business trend70 (highest)70 (highest)70 (highest)70 (highest)
Pricing power
Returns on capital0 (highest)0 (highest)0 (highest)0 (highest)
Balance-sheet safety55 (highest)55 (highest)55 (highest)55 (highest)
Capital discipline24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)
Price vs. high estimateNo price dataNo price dataNo price dataNo price data
Market cap$2.1B$88.3M$151.8M$1.5B
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025