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.
| ASM International | GitLab | Equinix | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | narrow The 2025 annual report (published 2026-03-12) says 'ASM is the leader in the fast-growing single-wafer ALD market – with a market share of 55%+ (ASM estimate, Investor Day 2025)'. It says ASM 'maintained leadership with our market share surpassing 55%' as the industry moved from FinFET to GAA. And it says that 'Based on the breadth of our R&D engagements and critical production-tool-of-record (PTOR) selections already secured in 2025, we expect to at least maintain our market share' into the 1.4nm node. The Q2 2026 results (https://www.asm.com/media/y0mkxj21/20260728-asm-reports-second-quarter-2026-results.pdf) say the 1.4nm node is on track for its first meaningful contribution in the second half of 2026, 'reflecting increased market share gains in both ALD and Epi'. 2025 gross margin was 51.8%. That is a strong, profitable position, but every share figure behind it is ASM's own estimate or expectation, and no independent share source supports it, so the rating is narrow rather than wide. The exposures also weigh: the five largest customers took about 53.6% of 2025 revenue and China more than 30%, and the report describes the main competitors as 'much larger companies from the United States and Asia'. | 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. | wide The FY2025 10-K (filed 2026-02-11) grounds the advantage in an asset that took 27 years to assemble and that a competitor cannot buy: "Over our 27-year history, we have curated a diverse, industry-leading ecosystem of more than 500,000 interconnections", "over 10,500 customers, including 2,000+ network service providers and a leading market share of cloud-on ramps", across "280 data centers, in 77 markets in 36 countries", with "99.9999%+ operational uptime" delivered in 2025 and no single customer at 10% of revenue. Because the value of each IBX rises with who else is already inside it, incumbency compounds rather than decays. The counterweight is real and disclosed: Item 1A says "The global multi-tenant data center market is highly fragmented. It is estimated that we are one of more than 2,400 companies that provide these offerings around the world", and warns that competitors "may adopt aggressive pricing policies". That caps the pricing that the moat converts into, not its durability — the fragmentation sits in commodity space-and-power, while the interconnection density the filing describes has no comparable substitute. FY2025 revenue of $9.217B with operating margin recovering to 20.0% from 15.2% in FY2024 is consistent with the incumbency holding. |
| Moat type | intangibles ip The report grounds the ALD lead in accumulated process know-how and patents rather than unit cost: 'ASM has the broadest portfolio of ALD products with innovative ALD reactor designs. Our strength in chemistries and applications using new materials means our customers can meet advanced node technology challenges.' It also cites a LexisNexis PatentSight study finding that 'ASM holds a strong and impactful patent portfolio on its core strength of ALD as measured by both Competitive Impact and Patent Asset Index'. Switching friction reinforces this. Tools enter fabs through PTOR selection, the report notes that 'Failing a customer during a production ramp could create significant problems for them', and installed systems are supported 'with a view to having them in production 24/7 for 20+ years'. But ASM wins those PTOR slots node by node on process capability, which makes IP the primary source. | 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." | network effects The 10-K names the mechanism itself, twice and unprompted: "As more customers choose Equinix for high connectivity and performance reliability at the metro edge, it benefits their suppliers and business partners to colocate in the same data centers and connect directly with each other. This adjacency creates a network effect that attracts new customers while continuously enhancing our value proposition to existing customers", and in the Competitive Landscape section, "This ecosystem creates a network effect that improves performance and lowers the cost for our customers". The evidence is the count of participants rather than any patent or unit-cost claim — 500,000+ interconnections, 2,000+ network service providers, a leading share of cloud on-ramps, an Internet Exchange the filing calls "the largest global peering solution". Switching costs are a genuine second layer (fixed-duration contracts billed on space and power, physical cross connects into resident counterparties), but they are what holds a customer already inside the ecosystem; the reason to enter in the first place is who is already there. |
| Leadership | co leader In single-wafer ALD, which is more than half of equipment sales, the report calls ASM 'the leader' with a 55%+ share. That share is ASM's own estimate; the Investor Day 2025 deck (https://www.asm.com/media/m3jhkm12/asm_investor_day_2025.pdf) sources it to 'ASM internal analysis and TechInsights'. With no independent share source, the band is held at co_leader rather than clear_leader. ASM does not lead every line: 'ASM has the number two share in the Epi equipment market', and in PECVD and vertical furnaces it is 'focused on niche portions of the market'. | 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. | clear leader Leadership is claimed on interconnection, not on square footage, and the filing's own evidence is about density: "our position is unmatched in the industry" is supported by 2,000+ resident network service providers, "a leading market share of cloud-on ramps", 500,000+ interconnections and an Internet Exchange described as "the largest global peering solution", across 36 countries. The band is read against neutral, ecosystem-dense colocation, where that footprint has no direct analogue. It is deliberately not read against total data centre capacity: the same 10-K puts Equinix among "more than 2,400 companies" in a "highly fragmented" MTDC market, and Item 1A concedes the company must compete for land and power against "new market entrants" drawn in by AI. |
| Pricing power | moderate Gross margin rose from 50.5% to 51.8% in 2025 and was 51.9% in Q2 2026. But the report attributes the 2025 gain to 'a very strong mix, including a continued solid contribution from the Chinese market' and to efficiency programs, not to price. It targets a range of 47% to 51% for 2026-2030, and the Q2 2026 release expects full-year 2026 gross margin 'to be around 51%'. Buyers are concentrated: the 10 largest customers were about 72.3% of 2025 revenue, the five largest about 53.6%, and two customers each contributed more than 10% of total revenue. | 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." | moderate Contract structure supports price: fixed-duration agreements billed on space and power plus per-connection interconnection fees, an installed base too physically entangled to move cheaply, and 99.9999%+ uptime in 2025 as the thing being paid for. FY2025 revenue of $9.217B grew about 5% on FY2024's $8.748B while operating margin recovered to 20.0% from 15.2%, so pricing and cost were at least held. But the filing itself refuses the strong band: competitors "may adopt aggressive pricing policies, especially if they are not highly leveraged or have lower return thresholds than we do. As a result, we may suffer from pricing pressure that would adversely affect our ability to generate revenues", and some rivals bundle communications or cloud services against bare colocation. Power procurement is a further pass-through risk the filing flags. Price is defended, not dictated. |
| Summary | ASM International, headquartered in the Netherlands, makes wafer-processing equipment with a focus on deposition: single-wafer ALD, silicon epitaxy, PECVD, vertical furnaces, silicon-carbide epitaxy and, since its acquisition of Axus in December 2025, CMP. Spares & Services made up 23% of 2025 revenue. ALD is the core. It was the largest product line, 'clearly accounting for more than half of our equipment sales', and ASM estimates its single-wafer ALD share at 55%+. The report frames ALD as increasingly necessary, saying 'ALD is the only deposition technology capable of meeting the coverage and film-property requirements for complex 3D structures', and expects ALD layers to grow in GAA transistor stacks, backside-power architectures and future 4F² DRAM. Epitaxy is the second-largest line: the report says ASM holds the number two share there and lifted its leading-edge share from 12% in 2020 to 25% in 2024, both by ASM's own figures. 2025 revenue reached a record €3.2 billion at a gross margin of 51.8%; per the Q2 2026 results, Q2 2026 revenue was €1,003 million at 51.9%. The exposures are customer concentration (the five largest customers were about 53.6% of 2025 revenue), geography (Asia was 80% of revenue and China more than 30%), and export restrictions that the report says are 'impacting our ability to sell and service systems in certain jurisdictions and for certain customers'. | 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". | Equinix is a network-neutral, multi-tenant colocation and interconnection REIT: it does not sell compute, it sells the metro-edge real estate where networks, clouds and enterprises physically meet. The FY2025 10-K describes the platform as "280 data centers, in 77 markets in 36 countries" serving "over 10,500 customers, including 2,000+ network service providers and a leading market share of cloud-on ramps", carrying "more than 500,000 interconnections" curated over 27 years, with 61% of 2025 revenue recognised outside the U.S. Revenue is structurally recurring — infrastructure offerings are "billed based on the space and power a customer consumes" under fixed-duration contracts generating MRR, interconnection is "billed based on the outbound connections from a customer" — and no customer reached 10% of 2025 revenue. AI enters the story as demand rather than as a product: the filing positions Equinix as the interconnect point for "model providers, data platforms, neoclouds and gateways", and pushes core hyperscale capacity into xScale, which is "developed and operated through our joint venture partnership arrangements". The bear case is in the company's own Item 1A. The MTDC market is "highly fragmented", Equinix being "one of more than 2,400 companies"; competitors "may adopt aggressive pricing policies"; the AI build-out invites "significant investments in the data center industry by both current competitors and new investors", after which "we could lose market share" and must "compete against certain of these competitors to secure the land and power needed for our expansion plans". Product extension has also failed before — the filing notes past offerings "have been or are being discontinued, including the Equinix Metal product". The honest reading: the interconnection ecosystem is close to unreplicable and the moat sits there; the capacity business around it is a capital race Equinix enters with scale but no immunity. |
| Chain position | Upstream wafer-fab-equipment supplier to logic/foundry and memory chipmakers. 'The leading-edge logic/foundry market was the main growth driver for ASM, on the back of 2nm investments' in 2025, advanced-node DRAM was the largest part of memory sales, and Asia was 80% of revenue. | 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. | Equinix is the neutral meeting point of the AI and cloud supply chain rather than a link in its manufacturing path: it houses other companies' compute and sells the adjacency between them. The 10-K places it between the network layer (2,000+ service providers), the cloud layer ("a leading market share of cloud-on ramps") and enterprise consumers who "assemble these capabilities into operational stacks", and describes an AI ecosystem "of model providers, data platforms, neoclouds and gateways" curated for enterprise AI demand. Core hyperscale training capacity sits beside that, not inside it, in xScale, built with JV partners so hyperscalers "add to their core hyperscale data center deployments and existing customer access points at Equinix". The revenue is therefore levered to AI's distribution and inference edge more than to training-cluster buildout. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.38 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |