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.
OFAL · Consumer Discretionary · No moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
WYNN · 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 | OFAL | WYNN | ECXJ | PRTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 32 (highest) | 32 (highest) | 32 (highest) | 32 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | — | 66 (highest) | 20 | 48 |
| Pricing power | 29 | — | 70 (highest) | 52 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 17 (highest) | 0 | 7 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 (highest) | 0 | 28 | 28 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 45 (highest) | 42 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 174% above high estimate | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $2.9M | $9.9B | $153.4M | $348.8M |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |