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.
WAY · Technology · Shallow 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 | PENG | WAY | INUV | RUN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 53 | 85 (highest) | 59 | 70 |
| Pricing power | 26 | — | 85 | 86 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 21 (highest) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 99 (highest) | 50 | 55 | 28 |
| Capital allocation | 44 | 60 (highest) | 44 | 60 (highest) |
| 546% above value if growth stopped today | 205% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | $2.8B | $4.3B | $14.3M | $2.3B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |