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.
PUMP · Materials · No 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 | PUMP | NWL | NL | CLF |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 39 (highest) | 39 (highest) | 39 (highest) | 38 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 72 (highest) | 37 | 38 | 51 |
| Pricing power | — | 55 (highest) | 52 | 1 |
| Returns on capital | 7 | 0 | 4 | 67 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 53 | 40 | 57 (highest) | 28 |
| Capital discipline | 24 | 64 (highest) | 43 | 44 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 14597% above high estimate | No price data | 26% below high estimate | 35% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) |
| Market cap | $1.3B | $2.1B | $280.0M | $5.1B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |