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.
RSI · Communications · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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%.
ACEL · Communications · 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%.
OSW · Communications · 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 | RSI | GLXZ | ACEL | OSW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 69 | 72 (highest) | 71 | 68 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 77 | 75 | 90 (highest) | 81 |
| Pricing power | 54 | 100 (highest) | — | — |
| Returns on capital | — | 97 (highest) | 62 | 39 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 13 | 73 | 77 |
| Capital discipline | 44 | 77 (highest) | 60 | 73 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | 311% above high estimate | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | — | $39.8M | — | — |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |