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.
BIIB · Healthcare · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
PRVA · Healthcare · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | ROK | ZBH | BIIB | PRVA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) | 67 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 39 | 75 | 32 | 80 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 69 | 100 (highest) | 96 | — |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 6 | 100 (highest) | 26 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 59 | 100 (highest) | — | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 68 (highest) | 55 | 40 | 60 |
| 310% above value if growth stopped today | 3% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 60% above value if growth stopped today | 1576% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $47.6B | $18.0B | $34.2B | $2.7B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |