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.
VRTS · Other · Narrow 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%.
WDLF · Other · Narrow moat
On the watchlist
The capitalDiscipline component abstained: Not enough owner-earnings history to score capital discipline. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
TW · Other · 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 | VRTS | CBOE | WDLF | TW |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 69 | 70 (highest) | 70 (highest) | 69 |
| Methodology version | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 | moat-index@3.0.0 |
| Business trend | 28 | 91 | 80 | 100 (highest) |
| Pricing power | — | 53 | 81 (highest) | — |
| Returns on capital | 89 (highest) | 46 | 18 | 23 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 73 |
| Capital allocation | 60 | 60 | — | 81 (highest) |
| 65% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 245% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | 317% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $788M | $32.1B | $2.2M | $24.6B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2022 | FY2025 |