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.
THC · Healthcare · 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 | USNA | CODA | THC | UFPT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 63 | 64 (highest) | 63 | 63 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 5 | 48 | 75 | 100 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 100 (highest) | 98 | — | 41 |
| Returns on capital | 97 (highest) | 63 | 49 | 46 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 100 (highest) | 28 | 59 |
| Capital allocation | 40 | 9 | 100 (highest) | 66 |
| 45% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 147% above value if growth stopped today | 9% above value if growth stopped today | 259% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $390M | $113M | $20.3B | $1.8B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |