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.
PZG · Materials · 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 | PZG | DLX | CE | TOMZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 40 (highest) | 40 (highest) | 40 (highest) | 40 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 61 (highest) | 56 | 38 | 52 |
| Pricing power | — | 92 | 35 | 93 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 16 | 38 (highest) | 4 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 55 (highest) | 3 | 28 | 28 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 35 | 64 (highest) | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 31% below high estimate | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $85.2M | $1.2B | — | $37.3M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |