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.
SLGN · Industrials · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
UAL · Industrials · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
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 | SLGN | UAL | PWR | LYTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 81 | 72 | 98 (highest) | 61 |
| Pricing power | 28 | — | 27 | 41 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 21 | 44 (highest) | 12 | 15 |
| Balance-sheet safety | — | 31 | 35 | 66 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 65 | 48 | 73 (highest) | 60 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 21% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 31% above high estimate | 469% above high estimate | 32% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $4.9B | $38.0B | $94.6B | $703.0M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |