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.
EGY · Materials · Narrow 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 | PKG | IOSP | AMRZ | EGY |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 60 (highest) | 60 (highest) | 60 (highest) | 60 (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 | 56 | 71 (highest) | 71 (highest) | 50 |
| Pricing power | 38 | 46 (highest) | 44 | — |
| Returns on capital | 71 | 38 | 86 | 91 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 100 (highest) | 33 | 55 |
| Capital allocation | 62 | 46 | 66 (highest) | 44 |
| 251074% above value if growth stopped today | 62% above value if growth stopped today | 112% above value if growth stopped today | 11% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | $22.69T | $2.1B | $27.9B | $579M |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |