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.
LGL · 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 | WDC | POWI | LGL | RBA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 52 (highest) | 52 (highest) | 52 (highest) | 52 (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 | 60 | 10 | 65 | 95 (highest) |
| Pricing power | 25 | 85 (highest) | — | 32 |
| Returns on capital | 42 | 46 (highest) | 9 | 41 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 73 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) | 32 |
| Capital allocation | 60 (highest) | 20 | 34 | 60 (highest) |
| 598% above value if growth stopped today | 207% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | 766% above value if growth stopped today | 266% above value if growth stopped today | |
| Market cap | $119.9B | $2.5B | $41.6M | $15.7B |
| Moat tier | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat | Shallow moat |
| Filing date | FY2026 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |