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.
| CoreWeave | NetApp | Iron Mountain | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | 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. | narrow The FY2026 10-K shows a real, durable lock but not an unassailable one. On the durable side: "Our cloud storage services are based on the same ONTAP data management software that underpins our on-premises ONTAP storage infrastructure offerings", and the same filing's income statement shows the company holding a gross margin near 71% across all three reported years - $4,433M on $6,268M in FY2024, $4,613M on $6,572M in FY2025 and $4,899M on $6,925M in FY2026 - while revenue grew from $6,268M to $6,925M and income from operations widened from 19% to 24% of net revenues. Holding that margin through the memory-cost shock the same filing discloses is the commercial evidence the lock is worth something. On the limiting side, the filing says competition "is intense", that in public cloud "customers may choose native cloud services that are consumed as operating expenses", and that "New competitors or alliances among existing competitors could emerge and quickly gain significant market share" - and IDC's 1Q26 external-storage tracker (Blocks & Files, 2026-06-16, cited on the AFF/ASA product row below) ranks NetApp second behind Dell, not first. | narrow Iron Mountain's physical-records franchise shows a real switching-cost advantage, but the FY2025 Form 10-K also describes a slowly shrinking need for it, and the growth businesses compete in open markets. On the advantage side, an independent record: the Department of Justice complaint published in the Federal Register on 2016-04-11 (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/04/11/2016-08210/united-states-v-iron-mountain-inc-and-recall-holdings-ltd-proposed-final-judgment-and-competitive) stated that "Iron Mountain is the largest RMS company in the United States" and that "Taken together, permanent withdrawal fees and other withdrawal restrictions make it difficult for a new RMS entrant to win customers away from existing RMS vendors." The 2025 10-K reports more than 740 million cubic feet stored, says "we have consistently experienced strong customer retention levels", and shows the Global RIM segment's Adjusted EBITDA margin at 44.7% in 2025 against 44.6% in 2024. On the limiting side, Item 1A says "Our Records Management and Data Management service revenue growth is being negatively impacted by declining activity rates as stored records and tapes are becoming less active and more archival" and "A significant shift by our customers to storage of data through non-paper or non-tape-based technologies, whether now existing or developed in the future, could adversely affect our businesses." In data centres the 10-K says it competes with "numerous data center developers, owners and operators, many of whom own properties comparable to ours". A strong, regulator-documented lock-in on a physical market the company itself expects only to hold steady, plus growth arms without that lock-in, is a narrow moat rather than a wide one. |
| Moat type | 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. | switching costs The FY2026 10-K makes the source of the advantage explicit and it is the cost of leaving the data-management layer, not a network or a patent estate. The same ONTAP software runs the on-premises arrays and the cloud services ("Our cloud storage services are based on the same ONTAP data management software that underpins our on-premises ONTAP storage infrastructure offerings"), and the AFF family "allows customers to connect to clouds for more data services, data tiering, caching, and disaster recovery". A customer's volume layout, snapshot and replication workflow and operating tools therefore carry from the array into Azure, AWS and Google rather than being abandoned at the cloud boundary — the filing describes NetApp as "the only provider of enterprise-grade storage services natively embedded in the world's largest public cloud providers", so the usual moment of escape is instead the moment the relationship renews. | switching costs The advantage is the cost and friction of moving stored records. The 10-K's Item 1A says that "if we are successful in winning record storage customers from competitors, the process of moving their stored records into our facilities is often costly and time consuming", and its notes record payments made "to a customer in order to terminate the customer's storage of records with its current records management vendor" as customer inducements. The DOJ complaint (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/04/11/2016-08210/united-states-v-iron-mountain-inc-and-recall-holdings-ltd-proposed-final-judgment-and-competitive) describes the mechanism: "Customer contracts also often impose a cap on the number of boxes per month that a customer may permanently remove from a RMS vendor's facility, such that a switch to a new RMS vendor may take several months to complete", and a new vendor "will have to offer to pay the fees to induce the customer to switch". Scale helps, since the 10-K says "the majority of our competitors operate in only one market or region", but the filing's own account of what keeps customers is retention and the cost of leaving, which makes switching costs the primary source. |
| Leadership | 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. | co leader IDC's 1Q26 external enterprise storage systems tracker, as reported by Blocks & Files on 2026-06-16 (cited in full on the AFF/ASA product row below), ranks NetApp second worldwide behind Dell and ahead of Everpure, Huawei and HPE, attributing the placing to "its growing all-flash business and cloud-integrated data management". Second of five ranked vendors, in a market whose leader is someone else, is a shared front rank rather than an owned one - and the distinct claim NetApp makes in the FY2026 10-K is positional rather than volumetric: being "the only provider of enterprise-grade storage services natively embedded in the world's largest public cloud providers". | clear leader The band applies to records management, the Global RIM segment that produced $5,291,481 thousand of 2025's $6,901,737 thousand revenue. Independent evidence: the DOJ complaint published in the Federal Register on 2016-04-11 (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/04/11/2016-08210/united-states-v-iron-mountain-inc-and-recall-holdings-ltd-proposed-final-judgment-and-competitive) stated "Iron Mountain is the largest RMS company in the United States", with fiscal 2014 worldwide revenues of "approximately $3.1 billion", and called Recall, with 2014 revenues of "approximately $836.1 million", "the second-largest RMS company in the United States"; the FY2025 10-K lists property "acquired in connection with our acquisition of Recall Holdings Limited". The 2025 10-K adds, in the company's own words, that "the majority of our competitors operate in only one market or region". The independent source is from 2016 and covers the United States only. Iron Mountain did go on to acquire Recall, but the proposed final judgment in the same notice required it to divest "Recall RMS assets in all fifteen geographic markets identified in the Complaint", thirteen of them to Access CIG, which the notice called "currently the third-largest RMS provider in the United States", so Recall's business was not absorbed whole. This leadership does not extend to data centres, where the Global Data Center segment's $803,429 thousand of 2025 revenue compares with total revenue of $9,217,000,000 at Equinix (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1101239/000110123926000032/0001101239-26-000032-index.htm) and $6,112,692,000 at Digital Realty (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1297996/000110465926015365/0001104659-26-015365-index.htm) in stored fundamentals from their FY2025 10-Ks. |
| Pricing power | 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. | moderate It holds price rather than raising it. On the figures filed with the FY2026 10-K, gross margin was 70.7% of revenue in FY2024 ($4,433M on $6,268M), 70.2% in FY2025 ($4,613M on $6,572M) and 70.7% in FY2026 ($4,899M on $6,925M) - flat across three years in which revenue grew from $6,268M to $6,925M - and it held that level while absorbing a component-cost shock. It is no stronger than that because the filing's own risk factor lists "competitive pricing, customer price sensitivity" and "pricing and discounting pressures" among the drivers of gross margin, and discloses that the company "experienced inflationary pressure and supply chain constraints beginning in the second half of fiscal 2026, resulting in increased costs for memory and other components, which have affected our gross margins" - a cost shock it is absorbing rather than fully passing on. | strong In records, growth comes from price on steady volume. MD&A attributes Global RIM "organic storage rental revenue growth driven by revenue management" (organic storage rental growth of 5.4% in 2025), while Item 1A says volumes "were relatively steady in 2025" and "Our organic revenue growth has been positively impacted by our ability to effectively introduce, expand and monitor revenue management. If we are not able to continue and effectively manage pricing, our results of operations could be adversely affected". The segment's Adjusted EBITDA margin was 44.7% in 2025 against 44.6% in 2024. In data centres MD&A cites "improved pricing" and "a 620 basis point increase in Adjusted EBITDA Margin reflecting recent lease commencements, improved pricing and cost containment", to 51.8% from 45.6%. The limits: Item 1A says that on power costs "we may be limited in our ability to, or may not always choose to, pass these increased costs on to our customers", and the 2016 DOJ complaint (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/04/11/2016-08210/united-states-v-iron-mountain-inc-and-recall-holdings-ltd-proposed-final-judgment-and-competitive) found that where Iron Mountain and Recall met, they "competed aggressively against one another for customers, resulting in lower prices for RMS". Adjusted EBITDA margin is a non-GAAP measure, and the Q2 2026 release (https://s204.q4cdn.com/148941814/files/doc_financials/2026/q2/FINAL-Q2-2026-Earnings-Press-Release.pdf) shows it at 35.8% for the company against 36.7% a year earlier. |
| Summary | 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. | NetApp sells storage hardware but the asset is ONTAP, the data-management software that has run its arrays for over three decades and now also runs inside the three largest public clouds as a first-party service. The FY2026 10-K organises the company into two segments, Hybrid Cloud (AFF and ASA all-flash arrays, AFX for AI workloads, FAS hybrid-flash, E/EF-Series, StorageGRID object storage) and Public Cloud (Azure NetApp Files, Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP, Google Cloud NetApp Volumes, Cloud Volumes ONTAP), and states that both rest on the same ONTAP software. That is the whole argument: an enterprise that has standardised its snapshots, replication and multiprotocol access on ONTAP carries those habits with it when it moves workloads to a hyperscaler, and NetApp is paid on both sides of the move. The evidence that the lock has commercial value is the margin's steadiness: across the three years the FY2026 10-K reports, gross margin sat at 70.7%, 70.2% and 70.7% of revenue ($4,433M on $6,268M, $4,613M on $6,572M, $4,899M on $6,925M) while revenue grew, and the filing's own percentage-of-revenue table shows no mix shift doing that work - product and services held near 46% and 54% of revenue throughout. The limits are equally in the filing. NetApp is second, not first: IDC's 1Q26 tracker puts it behind Dell in external enterprise storage, and the 10-K's competition section concedes that cloud providers are simultaneously partners and rivals, that consumption models "may reduce overall demand for our traditional on-premises offerings sold through a capital expenditure (capex) model", and that alternative architectures "may reduce or eliminate demand for some of our offerings". Component exposure is real too: the filing discloses "inflationary pressure and supply chain constraints beginning in the second half of fiscal 2026, resulting in increased costs for memory and other components, which have affected our gross margins", and names NAND among the components whose supply can tighten. This is a durable second place built on software stickiness, not a structural monopoly. | Iron Mountain stores and manages physical records for, per its FY2025 10-K, more than 240,000 customers in 61 countries, "including approximately 95% of the Fortune 1000", with "no single customer accounting for more than approximately 3% of revenue". Revenue was $6,901,737 thousand in 2025, of which the Global RIM segment contributed $5,291,481 thousand and the Global Data Center segment $803,429 thousand. The records business is the moat. Storage rental agreements "generally range from one to five years in length", the company says it has "consistently experienced strong customer retention levels", and a 2016 Department of Justice complaint described Iron Mountain as "the largest RMS company in the United States" and permanent withdrawal fees as a barrier to rivals winning customers. That lock-in shows up as pricing: MD&A attributes Global RIM storage growth to "revenue management" while Item 1A says volumes "were relatively steady in 2025". The threat is substitution: activity is declining as records become "less active and more archival", and a shift to non-paper storage "could adversely affect our businesses". The growth arms sit outside that moat. The company operated 31 data centers across 21 markets with 488 MW of capacity approximately 97% leased and a weighted average lease expiration of 10.3 years, counts "five of the largest global hyperscalers among our customers", and on 2026-08-05 reported data center leasing of 110 megawatts year to date and second-quarter revenue of $2.0 billion, up 18.5%. But in data centres it competes with operators owning "properties comparable to ours", and in asset lifecycle management with hyperscalers' own programmes. A durable switching-cost franchise in a market expected only to hold steady, funding growth businesses that compete on power, location and price, is a narrow moat. |
| Chain position | Layer-8 purpose-built AI neocloud — first-to-deploy NVIDIA systems for training and inference at scale. | NetApp sits between the memory supply and the enterprise data centre. Upstream, the FY2026 10-K says "Third-party component costs make up a significant portion of our product costs" and singles out NAND as hard to manage "if supplies of certain components, including NAND, become limited relative to demand". Downstream, the hyperscalers are channel, partner and rival at once: the filing states "We both partner with and compete against cloud service providers through our cloud-based software and services offerings", while Azure NetApp Files, Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP and Google Cloud NetApp Volumes are delivered as those clouds' own natively embedded services. Distribution is a mix of direct sales and "an ecosystem of partners, including the leading cloud providers". | In the AI build-out Iron Mountain is a landlord and a recycler. It leases data center capacity to hyperscale customers, with "five of the largest global hyperscalers among our customers", and its ALM business "provides hyperscale and corporate IT infrastructure managers with services and solutions that enable the decommissioning, data erasure, processing and disposition, and recycling or sale of IT hardware and component assets". Upstream, Item 1A says "We rely on third parties to provide power to our data centers" and that construction depends on "one or more design firms, general contractors, and associated subcontractors". |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.24 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |