Compare moats
Up to three covered companies, band by band. Every call is a curated editorial judgment, never a disclosed figure — and every band carries its cited basis.
| Applied Digital | Netflix | GitLab | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | none The FY2026 10-K (filed 2026-07-29) shows contracted revenue, not a demonstrated competitive edge. About 1,410 MW is leased under 15-year take-or-pay, non-cancellable base terms worth about $36.2 billion, but only about 100 MW of the roughly 1.5 GW that is contracted and either operating or under construction was operating and earning revenue at May 31, 2026, and Item 1A says "lessees may have the right to terminate applicable leases if there are significant delays in construction." Item 1A also concedes "We do not have the resources to compete with larger providers of similar products or services at this time," and the Competition section names 13 power-advantaged developers the company competes with. Signed leases give revenue visibility, but the filing does not show a durable advantage. | narrow FY2025 10-K (Item 1, Competition; filed 2026-01-23) calls the entertainment-video market 'intensely competitive and subject to rapid change,' with rivals holding exclusive content rights, 'large content libraries, and significant financial, marketing and other resources' and low member switching friction (members 'can change their plans at any time'). The offsetting durable advantage is monetized scale: the Q2 2026 shareholder letter (2026-07-16) guides 2026 revenue to $51.0-$51.4B at a 31.5% operating margin for an audience 'approaching 1B people' — a content budget and margin structure no pure-play streaming rival matches. | narrow The FY2026 10-K (year ended 2026-01-31) shows real expansion inside the installed base: 118% Dollar-Based Net Retention, Base Customers up to 10,682 from 9,893, customers above $100,000 of ARR up to 1,456 from 1,229, and $1.0 million ARR customers "to 155 from 123, an increase of 26%". But the filing concedes "limited barriers to entry" and names "Microsoft Corporation, which owns GitHub" as principal competitor. Retention decelerates (130% FY2024, 123% FY2025, 118% FY2026), and since DBNR is reported "on a threshold basis of 130%," the FY2024 figure is a cap and the slide is steeper than it looks. Narrow, not wide: expansion must be re-won against a bundled hyperscaler. |
| Moat type | none The 10-K claims three advantages: power-advantaged sites (it believes securing power and interconnection ahead of demand is 'the principal constraint on new HPC capacity and a core differentiator for us from many of our competitors'), a standardized 'franchise-style' design, and hyperscaler master service and master telecom service agreements 'that are difficult to obtain.' The filing does not show any of them to be durable. Its Competition section says competition 'centers on securing and developing sites with access to large-scale, reliable, and cost-competitive power and interconnection' and names 13 power-advantaged developers going after the same leases, and Item 1A concedes it lacks the resources to compete with larger providers. Signed leases are take-or-pay and non-cancellable, so a tenant leaving for convenience owes 'the full remaining contractual value,' but that is contractual lock-in on each lease rather than a moat source, so no moat type is assigned. | cost scale Content and technology spend is amortized across the industry's largest paid streaming membership base: the Q2 2026 shareholder letter (2026-07-16) reports members watched 97B+ hours in H1 2026 for an audience approaching 1B people, with Q2 operating margin of 33% — scale that lets Netflix outspend rivals on programming per subscriber dollar. A secondary intangibles layer sits on top: the FY2025 10-K (Item 1) says Netflix regards its copyrights, trademarks and the original content it produces as 'important to our success.' | switching costs Stickiness comes from platform embedding, not IP. The 10-K rests differentiation on "our single platform with a unified data model," on "Consolidation of multiple tools into a single platform," and on deployment inside the customer's own perimeter for regulated buyers. Replacement means re-integrating a toolchain and re-certifying compliance. IP is the wrong label: only "16 issued patents and 25 pending patent applications," plus open-source licenses granting "broad permissions to use, copy, modify, and redistribute." The no-lock-in claim is the filing's own characterisation, footnoted to a Forrester study "commissioned by GitLab." |
| Leadership | behind The 10-K makes no leadership claim and gives no ranking or share figure. Item 1A concedes "We do not have the resources to compete with larger providers of similar products or services at this time" and that some rivals have "substantially greater liquidity and financial resources than we do." Its Competition section places APLD against established operators (Digital Realty, Equinix), hyperscalers that build their own capacity, independent developers and 13 named power-advantaged developers (IREN, Cipher Digital, TeraWulf, Hut 8, Riot, CleanSpark, HIVE, Core Scientific, Bitdeer, Galaxy Digital, Fermi, Keel Infrastructure, MARA). | clear leader Nielsen's Media Distributor Gauge for May 2026 (published 2026-07-28): Netflix held 8.0% of total US TV watch-time, the largest of any subscription streamer (Amazon Prime Video 4.5%, Roku Channel 3.1%, Paramount 2.3%); YouTube — an ad-supported, largely user-generated platform — led all distributors at 13.8%. | fast follower The 10-K positions GitLab against a leader rather than as one: "Our principal competitor is Microsoft Corporation, which owns GitHub." Competition reads from the challenger side, differentiating "from GitHub through flexible deployment options that work within enterprise security and compliance requirements, LLM neutrality with self-hosted gateway support" and an open core model. On AI it follows: Duo Agent Platform went "Generally available in January 2026," the last month of the fiscal year. What keeps it a follower rather than behind is cadence, "a new version of our software every month for 172 months in a row," plus a regulated-deployment franchise a SaaS-first rival does not cover. |
| Pricing power | weak Item 1A says "Due to the limited number of hyperscalers, we expect that a limited number of customers will continue to account for a high percentage of our revenue for the foreseeable future," and that if customers' equipment usage declines or they discontinue use of its facilities, APLD "may be compelled to lower our lease prices in some instances or risk losing a significant customer." One customer was 59% of FY2026 revenue from continuing operations. Take-or-pay, non-cancellable terms protect contracted revenue over the base term, and Note 19 reports a $39.1M HPC Hosting segment profit on $385.3M of segment revenue in FY2026, but those terms are agreed with a small group of concentrated buyers. | strong Q2 2026 shareholder letter (2026-07-16): H1 2026 price changes 'in markets like the US, Mexico and Spain, have gone well with the impact consistent with prior price changes and our expectations,' and 2026 revenue growth of 13%-14% is guided as 'driven by growth in memberships and pricing' — repeated increases without guided membership damage. | moderate FY2026 gross margin was 87% against 89%, with cost of revenue up $35.6 million "primarily due to an increase of $18.4 million in third party hosting costs for SaaS and cloud usage," and management expects SaaS and Duo mix to bring costs that "may adversely impact our gross margins." Strain is explicit: GitLab "may be required to reduce our prices," competitors "may offer their products and services at a lower price or for free," and it "implemented user limits on our free SaaS product." Power retained: Premium lists at $29 per user/month billed annually, and seats bundle $12 and $24 of GitLab Credits. But "A majority of our subscriptions are on a one-year period." |
| Summary | Applied Digital designs, builds and operates purpose-built, liquid-cooled HPC data centers, which it calls 'AI factories', and leases the capacity to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers. At May 31, 2026 its 10-K lists five campuses (Polaris Forge 1-3 and Delta Forge 1-2) with about 1,410 MW contracted under roughly 15-year take-or-pay, non-cancellable leases worth about $36.2 billion over the base terms. The filing claims three sources of advantage: it controls power-advantaged sites, it uses a standardized 'franchise-style' design built to deliver about 150 MW in about 14 to 18 months, and it holds hyperscaler master agreements that are 'difficult to obtain.' The same document shows how early the company is. About 100 MW was operating and earning revenue. One customer was 59% of FY2026 revenue from continuing operations. It competes with Digital Realty, Equinix, hyperscalers that build their own capacity and 13 named power-advantaged developers, and it concedes that it lacks the resources to compete with larger providers. Signed leases give long-dated revenue visibility, but the filing does not show a durable competitive advantage. | Netflix's advantage is a self-reinforcing scale loop rather than lock-in: the largest paid streaming audience funds the largest content slate, which in turn wins what the 10-K calls 'moments of truth' against every other use of leisure time. The FY2025 10-K is candid that switching costs are low (members can change plans at any time) and that competition spans linear TV, rival streamers, user-generated platforms, gaming and piracy — so the moat is narrow, not wide. What sustains it now is monetization breadth on top of scale: per the Q2 2026 letter, repeated price increases keep landing 'consistent with prior changes and our expectations,' the ads business is on track to roughly double to ~$3B in 2026, live events drove six of the top 10 member sign-up days of the last five years on just over 5% of content spend, and GenAI workflows (used in roughly 300 titles in 2026) are lowering production cost. Nielsen's May 2026 Gauge places Netflix at 8.0% of total US TV time — the largest subscription streamer, though YouTube leads all distributors at 13.8% — which frames the real long-run contest: attention against free, user-generated video, not just against other paid streamers. | GitLab sells a single-platform DevSecOps toolchain defended by workflow lock-in rather than intellectual property: a unified data model plus deployment flexibility, including single-tenant "Dedicated for Government with FedRAMP compliance," makes it hard to remove where data residency is contractual. The installed base expands: 118% Dollar-Based Net Retention, 10,682 Base Customers, 1,456 above $100,000 of ARR, 155 above $1.0 million (up 26%), over 70% of ARR from public sector and enterprise. The filing supplies the counterweight: "limited barriers to entry," Microsoft/GitHub as principal competitor, 16 issued patents. Retention (130 to 123 to 118, the 130 a cap), gross margin (89% to 87%) and a January 2026 AI launch point to compression at the commodity end. No source measures market share, so every share band is "unknown". |
| Chain position | Developer and landlord of power-advantaged, liquid-cooled AI data-center capacity, leased long-term to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers. | Consumer-facing distributor at the end of the entertainment supply chain: the FY2025 10-K (Item 1) says revenues are 'primarily derived from monthly membership fees,' and Netflix competes two ways — downstream for viewers' leisure time and upstream 'against entertainment video providers and content producers in obtaining content,' both licensed and original; the ads tier adds a second monetization rail on the same distribution asset. | GitLab sits at the software-tooling layer, not compute or models. It consumes third-party LLM capacity — marketing "LLM neutrality and support for self-hosted AI gateways, including air-gapped environments" — so it captures no model-layer economics and bears inference as COGS, visible in the $18.4 million rise in hosting costs. Its distinctive position is the regulated perimeter. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | -0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.24 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |