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.
TKO · Communications · 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%.
FUN · Communications · Shallow moat
Doesn't clear the bar
| Measure | TKO | OPTU | FUN | KVHI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 44 (highest) | 44 (highest) | 44 (highest) | 44 (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 | 85 (highest) | 47 | 50 | 39 |
| Pricing power | — | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 40 (highest) | 9 | 0 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 30 | 0 | 28 | 55 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 20 | 64 (highest) | 41 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 1533% above high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data |
| Market cap | $35.5B | — | $1.8B | $175.0M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |