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.
PYPL · Technology · Wide 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%.
| Measure | OLED | PYPL | FDS | CART |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 86 | 87 (highest) | 87 (highest) | 86 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 77 | 89 | 100 (highest) | 80 |
| Pricing power | 99 (highest) | — | 90 | 98 |
| Returns on capital | 77 | 77 | 100 (highest) | 88 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 81 | 68 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 79 | 100 (highest) | 76 | 64 |
| 61% above value if growth stopped today | 3% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 68% above value if growth stopped today | 111% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $3.7B | $51.7B | $9.6B | $10.3B |
| Moat tier | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |