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.
DXC · Technology · Shallow 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 | RSKIA | UPWK | FDCTD | DXC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (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 | 50 | 75 | 85 (highest) | 15 |
| Pricing power | 80 | 96 (highest) | 53 | — |
| Returns on capital | 17 | 4 | 12 | 70 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 94 | 100 (highest) | 50 |
| Capital allocation | 73 | 24 | 44 | 100 (highest) |
| 100% above value if growth stopped today | 86% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | 89% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | $160M | $1.2B | Not reported | $1.6B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 |