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.
SLVM · 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 | SLVM | MLM | HCC | BRN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 50 | 51 (highest) | 51 (highest) | 50 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 27 | 84 (highest) | 30 | 16 |
| Pricing power | — | 37 | 48 | 86 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 91 | 19 | 92 (highest) | 88 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 42 | 31 | 62 (highest) | 33 |
| Capital discipline | 40 | 87 (highest) | 23 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 48% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) | 63% above high estimate | 49% above high estimate | No price data |
| Market cap | $1.5B | $33.4B | $4.2B | $12.8M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |