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.

ZONE · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The businessTrend component abstained: Fewer than two aligned fiscal years of revenue and diluted EPS are available; the filing history does not contain a measurable trend. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

TDAY · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The balanceSheet component abstained: Insufficient leverage/coverage inputs to score the balance sheet. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

CPSH · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

LEU · Materials · No moat

No moat

Doesn't clear the bar

The returnsOnCapital component abstained: Not enough years of ROIC data to score returns on capital. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.

MeasureZONETDAYCPSHLEU
Moat Score (0–100)37 (highest)37 (highest)37 (highest)37 (highest)
Methodology versionmoat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0moat-index@3.0.0
Business trend—355055 (highest)
Pricing power68 (highest)65017
Returns on capital0011 (highest)—
Balance-sheet safety55—100 (highest)31
Capital allocation2448 (highest)2444
No price data14% above value if growth stopped today (largest discount to value if growth stopped today)310% above value if growth stopped todayNo price data
Market cap$48.3M$1.0B$62.4MNot reported
Moat tierNo moatNo moatNo moatNo moat
Filing dateFY2026FY2025FY2025FY2025