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.
TZOO · Technology · Wide moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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%.
CTSH · Technology · Wide moat
Wonderful & reasonably priced
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 | TZOO | CTSH | NSSC | AAPL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 83 | 84 (highest) | 84 (highest) | 83 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 95 (highest) | 73 | 93 | 81 |
| Pricing power | 99 (highest) | — | 53 | 63 |
| Returns on capital | — | 89 | 93 | 100 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 94 |
| Capital allocation | 40 | 75 | 80 (highest) | 75 |
| 34% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 4% above value if growth stopped today | 170% above value if growth stopped today | 358% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $61.7M | $28.7B | $1.3B | $4.97T |
| Moat tier | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat | Wide moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 |