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.
WAY · 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 | WAY | TOST | KVYO | INUV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (highest) | 49 (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 | 85 (highest) | 85 (highest) | 65 | 59 |
| Pricing power | — | 8 | 100 (highest) | 85 |
| Returns on capital | 0 | 7 (highest) | 0 | 0 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 50 | 100 (highest) | 55 | 55 |
| Capital allocation | 60 (highest) | 44 | 24 | 44 |
| 205% above value if growth stopped today | No price data | No price data | No price data | |
| Market cap | $4.3B | Not reported | $4.8B | $14.3M |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |