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.
SD · Materials · 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 | SD | WLY | ECL | EL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 58 (highest) | 58 (highest) | 58 (highest) | 57 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 48 | 57 | 83 (highest) | 47 |
| Pricing power | — | 98 | 70 | 99 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 34 | 25 | 30 | 86 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 46 | 44 | 0 |
| Capital discipline | 49 | 64 (highest) | 62 | 53 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 35% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | No price data | 348% above high estimate | 168% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $503.4M | — | $75.8B | $30.1B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 |