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.
RDVT · 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%.
HNIT · Technology · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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 | PUBM | ATKR | RDVT | HNIT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 54 | 55 (highest) | 55 (highest) | 54 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 46 | 19 | 90 (highest) | 20 |
| Pricing power | 96 | 25 | — | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 30 | 88 (highest) | 4 | — |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 55 |
| Capital allocation | 44 (highest) | 40 | 24 | 42 |
| 182% above value if growth stopped today | 52% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 499% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | |
| Market cap | $838M | $3.2B | $1.1B | $445M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |