Skip to content

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.

comparing AppLovin×CXMT×Oracle× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
AppLovin APP ai moat: latest change 2026-02-19 CXMT 688825.SS ai moat: latest change 2026-08-29 Oracle ORCL ai moat: latest change 2026-06-22
Moat rating narrow

The filing's own words support a narrow moat. Auctions run 'at vast scale and at microsecond-level speeds,' revenue is earned only 'when our advertisers achieve their return on advertising spend targets,' and FY2025 adjusted EBITDA margin was 82.3%. What limits the width: clients 'are not required to enter into long-term agreements' and 'Substantially all of the Company's contracts with customers are cancelable at any time'; the solutions 'primarily operate in the mobile app ecosystem and specifically mobile gaming'; and distribution runs through 'the Apple App Store, the Google Play Store, and Meta' while AppLovin relies 'in part on IDFA.'

source: sec.gov

none

CXMT's 2026 interim report (published 2026-08-29) names scale and IDM technology as core competencies, but also concedes gaps. It says that compared with the leading international manufacturers the Company 'still has a certain gap in overall scale, technology accumulation and customer resources' (与国际头部厂商相比,公司在整体规模、技术积累、客户资源等方面仍然存在一定差距). It describes its scale effect as 'gradually emerging' (逐步显现), and its gross-margin risk covers the case where the scale effect cannot materialise over the long term (公司规模效应长期无法显现). Its excess returns span a single shortage. The retained-earnings note shows an accumulated deficit of ¥36.65bn entering 2026, after ¥1.87bn of 2025 net profit attributable to the parent, and the first-half 2025 net loss attributable to shareholders was ¥2.33bn. Then first-half 2026 revenue rose 873.64%, which the report attributes to the global DRAM supply shortage, higher prices and sharply higher volumes, and the main-business gross margin reached 84.84%.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

wide

Oracle's FY2026 10-K (fiscal year ended May 31, 2026) describes an installed base in which "substantially all customers opt to purchase software support contracts when they purchase an Oracle software license"; that entrenchment shows up externally as the #1 DB-Engines database ranking (August 2026, first of 435 systems) and $638B of contracted Remaining Performance Obligations at Q4 FY2026 (press release, June 10, 2026) — a durable, multi-decade lock on mission-critical enterprise data layers.

source: sec.gov

Moat type network effects

Network effects, with a caveat. The 10-K states the loop: as more advertisers use the solutions 'we gain access to more data regarding users and user engagement,' 'further strengthening our scaled distribution,' and 'As our distribution grows, we gain better insights for Axon AI.' The mechanism is two-sided matching of advertiser demand to publisher supply, though much of the force comes from data-and-learning scale. It is not switching costs, since contracts are 'cancelable at any time,' nor intangibles or IP, since 'there can be no assurance that we will adequately protect our intellectual property or that it will provide any competitive advantage.'

source: sec.gov

none

On the report's own evidence, no candidate moat source qualifies. Cost scale: the report calls DRAM a highly standardised product (高度标准化的产品) in which the cost advantage of scale is a core competency. But CXMT ranks fourth globally by capacity, and the report, calculating on sales, puts Samsung, SK hynix and Micron at 33.96%, 34.48% and 23.41% of the 2025 global DRAM market, so the scale advantage lies with the leaders. IP: it reports 4,484 domestic patents (3,744 of them invention patents) and 3,400 overseas patents as of 2026-06-30. Yet it describes its core technology as reaching 'international advanced level' (国际先进水平) and flags possible IP disputes with competitors. Switching costs: ¥133.48bn of ¥150.31bn first-half 2026 revenue went through distributors, who under the report's revenue note decide their own resale prices.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

switching costs

The core moat is the cost of moving mission-critical databases and back-office suites: the FY2026 10-K notes substantially all license customers attach support contracts and that Oracle's Multicloud Database offerings run Oracle AI Database inside other hyperscalers' clouds — monetizing the installed base even when the customer's infrastructure leaves; the KLAS 2026 EHR report shows the same dynamic in health IT, where roughly a third of Oracle Health customers want to leave but feel unable to do so.

source: sec.gov

Leadership at parity

The filing discloses no share of any market, names 'Meta, Google, Amazon, and Unity Software' as competitors, and concedes rivals 'may have greater resources' and 'better technological or data analytics capabilities, or stronger brands or competitive positions in certain product segments.' Its one positional statement is parity language: 'We believe we compete favorably with respect to these factors.' Two unquantified points cut upward: Meta and Google are also clients, and MAX is called 'the preferred in-app bidding solution for many publishers worldwide.'

source: sec.gov

fast follower

TrendForce (2026-09-24) reports that CXMT's global DRAM revenue share rose to 9.5% in 2Q26 from 7.6% in 1Q26, 'placing it fourth behind Samsung at 39.4%, SK hynix at 24.9%, and Micron at 23.3%'. It is catching up through generation-skipping R&D. The interim report had its fifth process platform in customer certification, and a voluntary disclosure on 2026-09-21 announced that platform's mass production, adding that its products are not yet in scale sales and yields need time to ramp. TrendForce's listing analysis (2026-07-28) still says CXMT 'still trails Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron in advanced processes, product performance, yields, and certification by high-end customers'.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

co leader

Split by line: clear leader in database (DB-Engines August 2026 ranks Oracle #1 and Oracle-owned MySQL #2 of 435 systems); one of the largest enterprise-application vendors ($15.9B FY2026 SaaS revenue, competing with SAP, Salesforce, Workday and Microsoft per the FY2026 10-K); but in cloud infrastructure a ~4%-share fast-growing challenger behind Amazon (28%), Microsoft (20%) and Google (15%) per Synergy Q2 2026 data (The Register, 2026-08-01), and #2 in US acute-care EHR behind Epic (KLAS 2026).

source: sec.gov

Pricing power strong

Strong, with the mechanism shown. The 10-K states that 'Advertisers are charged dynamically based on their campaign goals , rather than a simple fixed price per impression or per action.' Growth composition is the evidence: FY2025 revenue +70% with 'the volume of installations increased 3% and net revenue per installation increased 72%'; H1 2026 +56% with per-installation revenue +75% against 'a decrease in the volume of installations of 10%.' Adjusted EBITDA margin was 82.3% in FY2025 and 84.2% in H1 2026, though payment is performance-contingent and contracts cancel at will.

source: sec.gov

weak

CXMT is a price taker riding the cycle. The interim report attributes first-half revenue growth to the global DRAM supply shortage, rising prices and sharply higher volumes. It records industry prices between 2015 and 2025 as high as $7.89/GB and as low as $1.78/GB in first-half 2023, and it states that the continued steep price rise is not sustainable. Main-business revenue was ¥15.22bn against cost of ¥13.29bn in first-half 2025, and ¥150.04bn against ¥22.75bn in first-half 2026. Most sales go through distributors, who set their own resale prices.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

moderate

Strong in the installed base — the FY2026 10-K states substantially all license customers purchase support contracts, a recurring stream customers rarely drop — but the same 10-K lists "total cost of ownership" first among key competitive factors and describes intense competition across every segment; AI-infrastructure deals are won against hyperscalers and neoclouds, and Q4 FY2026 SaaS grew a moderate 10% versus 93% for IaaS (press release, June 10, 2026).

source: sec.gov

Summary

One reportable segment: an AI-priced auction matching advertiser demand to publisher supply, where 'Revenue from Axon Ads Manager comprises substantially all of our revenue.' The filed flywheel is real - more advertiser spend yields more user-engagement data, 'further strengthening our scaled distribution,' which feeds Axon AI - and it converts: FY2025 revenue $5.48B, up 70%, at an 82.3% adjusted EBITDA margin, carried by price (net revenue per installation +72%) not volume (installations +3%). What the filing does not evidence is a lock. Contracts are cancelable at any time, revenue concentrates in mobile gaming, and the distribution and identifier layers belong to Apple, Google and Meta - two of whom are simultaneously named competitors and disclosed clients. Wide margins with no disclosed structural lock is narrow.

CXMT (ChangXin) is a Hefei-based IDM that designs and fabricates DDR5 and LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/5X/LPDDR6 memory and sells DRAM wafers, chips and modules. Its 2026 interim report says it reached its fourth process platform through a 'generation-skipping' (跳代研发) R&D strategy, and that it ranks first in China and fourth globally by shipments and sales. First-half 2026 revenue was ¥150.31bn (DDR series ¥69.47bn, LPDDR series ¥78.19bn), with a main-business gross margin of 84.84%. TrendForce puts its 2Q26 DRAM revenue share at 9.5%, up from 7.6% in 1Q26. The position is real but recent. The report concedes gaps to the three leaders in scale, technology and customers. The customers it names are Alibaba Cloud, ByteDance, Tencent, Lenovo, Xiaomi, Transsion, Honor, OPPO and vivo. On 2026-06-08 the US Defense Department added its subsidiary ChangXin Memory to the Section 1260H list. TrendForce notes that export controls leave CXMT relying on DUV multiple patterning rather than EUV, and that its prospectus 'has not disclosed a clear mass-production timetable' for HBM. The report itself warns that the continued steep rise in DRAM prices is not sustainable (价格的持续大幅上涨不具备可持续性) as international makers add capacity.

Oracle pairs the deepest switching-cost franchise in enterprise software — the #1-ranked database (DB-Engines, August 2026) plus Fusion/NetSuite back-office suites, with support attach near-universal per the FY2026 10-K — with a late but explosive push into AI cloud infrastructure: Q4 FY2026 IaaS revenue grew 93% to $5.8B and RPO reached $638B (up 363% YoY), mostly large-scale AI contracts (press release, June 10, 2026). The two reinforce each other via multicloud — Oracle Multicloud AI Database grew 404% in Q4 running inside rival clouds. The offsets: in cloud infrastructure Oracle is still a ~4%-share challenger behind AWS/Microsoft/Google (Synergy Q2 2026 data via The Register), the AI buildout drove FY2026 free cash flow to negative $23.7B, and the Cerner-based Oracle Health business has lost US hospital share for three straight years (KLAS 2026).

Chain position

Demand-side AI ad platform: it monetizes third-party mobile-game publishers' inventory and sells outcomes to advertisers, so it sits downstream of Apple/Google app distribution and Apple's IDFA identifier layer and upstream of publisher monetization. Meta and Google are simultaneously named competitors and disclosed clients. Single reportable segment after the June 2025 Apps divestiture.

Upstream DRAM IDM selling wafers, chips and modules to server, smartphone, PC and automotive makers, mostly through distributors (¥133.48bn of ¥150.31bn first-half 2026 revenue).

Supply-chain role in AI: OCI sells GPU compute for AI training and inference — the Q4 FY2026 press release attributes most of the $85B sequential RPO increase to large-scale AI contracts (some with customer-prepaid or customer-supplied GPUs totaling $75B) and guides FY2027 total revenue to $90B — making Oracle a primary capacity supplier to AI model builders.

Products (share / barrier)
Long-horizon vote +0.11 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

+0.30 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →