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.

Try AAPL vs MSFT vs KO, V vs MA, or COST vs WMT vs TGT.

XPOF · Communications · No moat

No 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%.

WYTC · Communications · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

WNLV · Communications · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The capitalDiscipline component abstained: Not enough owner-earnings history to score capital discipline. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

LLYVA · Communications · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Only one aligned fiscal year of revenue and diluted EPS is available; a trend needs at least two observations. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MeasureXPOFWYTCWNLVLLYVA
Moat Score (0–100)24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)24 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend65 (highest)2028
Pricing power3041 (highest)23
Returns on capital7 (highest)000
Balance-sheet safety028 (highest)28 (highest)28 (highest)
Capital allocation2444 (highest)44 (highest)
No price dataNo price dataNo price dataNo price data
Market cap$220M$15.7M$110994$8.8B
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2025FY2024FY2025FY2025