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.
OSW · Communications · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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%.
ACEL · Communications · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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%.
RSI · Communications · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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%.
FULO · Communications · Narrow moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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 | OSW | ACEL | RSI | FULO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 68 | 71 (highest) | 69 | 67 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 81 | 90 (highest) | 77 | 51 |
| Pricing power | — | — | 54 | 92 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 39 | 62 (highest) | — | — |
| Balance-sheet safety | 77 | 73 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 73 (highest) | 60 | 44 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data | 43% below high estimate |
| Market cap | — | — | — | $6.8M |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2023 |