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.
CHH · Consumer Discretionary · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
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 | ULS | CHH | URBN | LEVI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 76 | 77 (highest) | 77 (highest) | 76 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 72 | 95 (highest) | 91 | 53 |
| Pricing power | 82 | — | 50 | 89 (highest) |
| Returns on capital | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 80 | 93 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 78 | 12 | 73 | 80 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | 49 | 100 (highest) | 89 | 65 |
| 400% above value if growth stopped today | 53% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 82% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | |
| Market cap | $17.2B | $5.1B | $6.3B | Not reported |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 |