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 Cisco Systems×Applied Digital×CoreWeave× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
Cisco Systems CSCO ai moat: latest change 2025-09-03 Applied Digital APLD ai moat: latest change 2026-07-29 CoreWeave CRWV ai moat: latest change 2026-03-02
Moat rating narrow

The FY2025 10-K shows a moat that still pays but no longer compounds: total gross margin of 64.9% and remaining performance obligations of $43,533 million (up 6%) against a Networking product category that fell from $34,570 million in fiscal 2023 to $29,229 million in fiscal 2024 to $28,304 million in fiscal 2025, and a product gross-margin bridge in which 'Product pricing' subtracted 1.6 percentage points. All of the reported category growth came from Splunk-carrying lines - Security +59% and Observability +26%. Real and durable, but bounded: narrow, not wide.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2025 10-K describes a purpose-built AI cloud with a real performance edge, but its own risk section discloses the defining constraint: 'approximately 67% of our revenue from our top customer, Microsoft, for the year ended December 31, 2025' — a specialized platform whose economics rest on one buyer that is also a hyperscaler competitor is narrow, not wide.

source: sec.gov

Moat type switching costs

The durable piece is the contracted annuity attached to installed equipment: total remaining performance obligations of $43,533 million, of which $21,961 million is services and $21,810 million is long-term (recognised beyond twelve months), carried at a services gross margin of 68.5% that has risen for three consecutive years from 66.4% and 68.1%. Customers keep paying for support on gear they already run.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

cost scale

The 10-K grounds the advantage in purpose-built infrastructure — first-to-deploy NVIDIA GB200/GB300 NVL72 systems and a data-center fabric 'designed to harness the full potential of each GPU' — a performance-per-dollar edge at scale, not a customer lock.

source: sec.gov

Leadership co leader

The 10-K names no competitor and discloses no market share anywhere in Management's Discussion and Analysis. The positional facts it does give are scale and direction: Networking product revenue of $28,304 million in fiscal 2025 - by far the largest of its four categories - but down $6.3 billion from fiscal 2023, with channel partner financing volume falling from $32.1 billion to $27.1 billion to $24.9 billion across fiscal 2023-2025.

source: sec.gov

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).

source: sec.gov

co leader

The 10-K positions CoreWeave as a first-to-deploy specialist against hyperscalers who offer AI compute 'as part of a broader product portfolio' — a leader of the purpose-built neocloud niche, not of the AI-cloud market its own filing says it competes in.

source: sec.gov

Pricing power moderate

The product gross-margin bridge attributes fiscal 2025's 0.2-point improvement to productivity (+2.0 points) and mix (+1.1 points) while 'Product pricing' subtracted 1.6 points; a legal dispute with a supplier cost a further 0.8 points. Total gross margin of 64.9% (product 63.7%, services 68.5%) is held by cost and mix, not by price.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

moderate

A first-to-deploy performance edge on scarce new NVIDIA systems supports pricing while the hardware is scarce, but 67% single-customer concentration is buyer leverage the filing states outright.

source: sec.gov

Summary

The installed base still switches slowly - but the filing does not claim it is winning the AI datacenter on the strength of that base. The fiscal 2025 Networking decline is attributed to 'product shipments returning to normalized levels during the first half of fiscal 2025 from the elevated levels ... in the first half of fiscal 2024', to servers, and to 'a decline in campus switching' - normalisation, not disclosed share loss, so the whitebox/Arista thesis is not something this 10-K either confirms or denies. What the filing does disclose is the shape of the AI dollar Cisco is actually winning: Americas service provider and cloud growth 'driven by AI infrastructure revenue from webscale customers', funded by additional purchase commitments 'related to manufacturing Cisco Silicon One and other products to meet demand from webscale and other customers', which 'significantly increased our supply chain exposure, which has resulted in negative impacts to our product gross margin in recent periods and may result in further negative impacts in future periods'. Enterprise switching earns 63.7% product gross margin; webscale silicon costs margin to serve. The moat is intact where the annuity is and thin where the growth is.

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.

CoreWeave sells a full-lifecycle AI cloud — training, inference, data movement, agentic workflows — on infrastructure 'purpose-built to accelerate breakthroughs by AI pioneers,' with the Weights & Biases acquisition adding the developer tooling layer as 'a single stack.' The edge the filing claims is speed and efficiency on the newest NVIDIA systems. The moat's ceiling is in the same document's risk factors: 67% of 2025 revenue came from Microsoft, and the hyperscalers it competes with are 'also customers of, and partners to, CoreWeave' — the largest buyer and the largest rival are the same companies.

Chain position

Supplies networking into AI datacenters: the 10-K ties Americas service provider and cloud growth to 'AI infrastructure revenue from webscale customers' and to Cisco Silicon One manufacturing commitments.

Developer and landlord of power-advantaged, liquid-cooled AI data-center capacity, leased long-term to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers.

Layer-8 purpose-built AI neocloud — first-to-deploy NVIDIA systems for training and inference at scale.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Cisco Silicon One and webscale AI infrastructure Challenger · Low source: sec.gov
  • Collaboration (Webex Suite, devices, Contact Center, CPaaS) Challenger · Low source: sec.gov
  • Networking (switching, routing, wireless, servers) Leader · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Observability (Splunk Observability Suite, ThousandEyes) Niche · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Security (Splunk TDR, SASE, network security) Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Technical support and services Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
  • Blockchain data center hosting (Jamestown / Ellendale) Niche · Low source: sec.gov
  • HPC data center leasing (Polaris Forge / Delta Forge AI factories) Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • CoreWeave Cloud (GPU compute platform) Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
  • Weights & Biases (AI developer tooling) Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

+0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →