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.
SLB · Materials · 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%.
LIN · Materials · 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 | SLB | LIN | CSW | CMPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 70 (highest) | 70 (highest) | 70 (highest) | 69 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 95 (highest) | 85 | 95 (highest) | 68 |
| Pricing power | 100 (highest) | — | 75 | 82 |
| Returns on capital | 20 | 26 | 56 (highest) | 42 |
| Balance-sheet safety | — | 76 (highest) | 50 | 53 |
| Capital allocation | 65 | 94 | 75 | 100 (highest) |
| 54% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | No price data | 243% above value if growth stopped today | 148% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $74.0B | Not reported | $4.7B | $1.9B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2026 |