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.
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%.
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%.
| Measure | WDLF | RHLD | CBOE | VRTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moat Score (0–100) | 70 | 71 (highest) | 70 | 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 | 80 | 50 | 91 (highest) | 28 |
| Pricing power | 81 | 88 (highest) | 53 | — |
| Returns on capital | 18 | 100 (highest) | 46 | 89 |
| Balance-sheet safety | 100 (highest) | 75 | 100 (highest) | 100 (highest) |
| Capital allocation | — | 44 | 60 (highest) | 60 (highest) |
| No price data | No price data | 221% above value if growth stopped today | 53% below value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today) | |
| Market cap | $2.6M | $1.2B | $29.8B | $1.1B |
| Moat tier | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat | Narrow moat |
| Filing date | FY2022 | FY2025 | FY2025 | FY2025 |