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.

UBER · Technology · Shallow moat

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%.

TRSO · Technology · 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%.

GDRX · Technology · Shallow moat

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%.

UPYY · Technology · 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%.

MeasureUBERTRSOGDRXUPYY
Moat Score (0–100)50 (highest)50 (highest)50 (highest)50 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0moat-index@2.0.0
Business trend786086 (highest)23
Pricing power7086 (highest)
Returns on capital5 (highest)0
Balance-sheet safety74 (highest)283728
Capital discipline444478 (highest)64
Price vs. high estimate440% above high estimateNo price data19% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate)No price data
Market cap$149.2B$466523$1.1B$15.8M
Moat tierShallow moatShallow moatShallow moatShallow moat
Filings as ofFY2025FY2025FY2025FY2026