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.
HHS · Technology · 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%.
| Measure | VRT | LQDT | DOCU | HHS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) | 59 (highest) |
| 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) | 60 | 75 | 20 |
| Pricing power | 53 | 80 | 100 (highest) | — |
| Returns on capital | 28 | 57 | 25 | 91 (highest) |
| Balance-sheet safety | 92 | 100 (highest) | 73 | 100 (highest) |
| Capital discipline | 28 (highest) | 0 | 24 | 24 |
| Price vs. high estimate | 1557% above high estimate | 311% above high estimate | 1071% above high estimate | 78% above high estimate (largest discount to high estimate) |
| Market cap | $111.1B | $1.4B | $10.0B | $17.9M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filings as of | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2026 | FY2025 |