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.

RGCO · Utilities · No moat

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%.

ET · Utilities · No moat

No 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%.

AEP · Utilities · No moat

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%.

ETR · Utilities · No moat

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%.

MeasureRGCOETAEPETR
Moat Score (0–100)3031 (highest)3030
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend6579 (highest)75
Pricing power32
Returns on capital111 (highest)20
Balance-sheet safety2 (highest)12 (highest)1
Capital allocation5280 (highest)3944
81% above value if growth stopped today14% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today)79% above value if growth stopped today167% above value if growth stopped today
Market cap$227M$70.0B$73.3B$52.5B
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025