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.
TRLEF · Materials · No 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%.
LRDC · Materials · No 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%.
MDU · Materials · No 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 | TRLEF | NINE | LRDC | MDU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 18 | 20 (highest) | 20 (highest) | 18 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 | moat-index@2.0.0 |
| Business trend | 20 | 50 (highest) | 27 | 29 |
| Pricing power | — | 4 (highest) | 0 | — |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 4 | — | 5 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 28 (highest) | 0 | 28 (highest) | 2 |
| Capital discipline | 24 | 44 (highest) | 24 | 35 |
| Price vs. high estimate | No price data | No price data | No price data | 4% above high estimate |
| Market cap | $15.1M | $496.1M | $59.8M | $4.3B |
| Moat tier | No moat | No moat | No moat | No moat |
| Filings as of | FY2020 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |