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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

QSP · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

LEAT · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

REAL · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat

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%.

WW · Consumer Discretionary · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MeasureQSPLEATREALWW
Moat Score (0–100)52 (highest)52 (highest)52 (highest)52 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend1765 (highest)7
Pricing power97 (highest)719389
Returns on capital344988 (highest)
Balance-sheet safety40100 (highest)28
Capital allocation38 (highest)242424
No price data106% above value if growth stopped todayNo price dataNo price data
Market capNot reported$80.5M$1.3B$133M
Moat tierShallow moatShallow moatShallow moatShallow moat
Filing dateFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025