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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

TPET · Materials · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The capitalDiscipline component abstained: Not enough owner-earnings history to score capital discipline. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

DQWS · Materials · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

OEC · Materials · Shallow moat

Shallow moat

On the watchlist

FUL · Materials · Shallow moat

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%.

MeasureTPETDQWSOECFUL
Moat Score (0–100)42 (highest)42 (highest)42 (highest)42 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0
Business trend70573879 (highest)
Pricing power70 (highest)153746
Returns on capital040 (highest)7
Balance-sheet safety2855 (highest)40
Capital discipline4155 (highest)34
Price vs. high estimateNo price data2498% above high estimate66% below high estimate (largest discount to high estimate)6% below high estimate
Market cap$2.9M$6.4M$395.3M$3.0B
Moat tierShallow moatShallow moatShallow moatShallow moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2025