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 GitLab×Everpure, Inc.×Fabrinet× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
GitLab GTLB ai moat: latest change 2026-08-05 Everpure, Inc. P ai moat: latest change 2026-03-25 Fabrinet FN ai moat: latest change 2026-08-18
Moat rating 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.

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2026 10-K shows a technology edge that does not dominate its market. On the durable side, the filing states "Our extended advantage stems from three technology differentiators" (direct-to-NAND software, integrated DirectFlash modules and flash-management capabilities), reports over 14,500 customers including "approximately 64% of Fortune 500 companies" and a certified Net Promoter Score of 84, and its income statement shows gross profit of $2,021.2M on $2,830.6M of revenue in FY2024, $2,212.7M on $3,168.2M in FY2025 and $2,578.0M on $3,662.8M in FY2026. On the limiting side, the same filing describes "the intensely competitive data storage market", says many rivals have "substantially greater financial, technical and other resources" and "larger and more mature intellectual property portfolios", and concedes that incumbents keep accounts partly because the customer worries about "actual or perceived costs of switching to a new vendor and technology". IDC's 1Q26 tracker (cited on the array row below) ranks Everpure third, behind Dell and NetApp. A real, technology-based edge held by the number-three vendor is a narrow moat, not a wide one.

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2026 10-K grounds a real but bounded defence. On the defence side: Item 1 states that in the manufacturing services market "there are significant barriers to entry in our existing and target markets, including lengthy sales cycles, the need to demonstrate complex precision optical and electro-mechanical engineering and manufacturing capabilities to a prospective customer and the ability to protect a customer's intellectual property," and that qualification of a program "may take three to six months or longer to complete." On the limiting side, the same filing shows the protection does not reach price: gross profit was 12.0% of revenues in FY2026 against 12.1% in FY2025 and 12.4% in FY2024 even as revenue rose 35.7% to $4.64 billion, four customers each exceeded 10% of revenue (Cisco 19.9%, NVIDIA 16.3%, Nokia 10.7%, Amazon 10.5%), and "reliance on a small number of customers gives those customers substantial purchasing power and leverage in negotiating contracts with us." Sales are made on "individual purchase orders that have short lead times and are subject to revision or cancellation," so the qualified program is sticky while the contract is not.

source: sec.gov

Moat type 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."

source: sec.gov

intangibles ip

The FY2026 10-K puts the source of advantage in proprietary technology. It names the differentiators as "Direct-to-NAND Software Leadership", "Integrated Hardware–Software DirectFlash Modules" and "Next-Generation Flash Management Capabilities", explains that because its flash-management software "requires less NAND" it avoids SSD over-provisioning, and states that the QLC benefits of FlashArray//C "are only achievable through our DirectFlash integrated hardware and software approach". The company holds "over 3,000 issued patents and patent applications". That technology, not customer lock-in, is what Everpure credits for its hyperscaler design wins. Evergreen's non-disruptive upgrades add a retention layer, but the 10-K's own risk factors show that switching costs mostly favour the incumbents Everpure is displacing, and that rivals hold "larger and more mature intellectual property portfolios" - so the edge is a specific flash-management technique rather than portfolio breadth.

source: sec.gov

switching costs

The 10-K locates the stickiness in qualification rather than in patents or scale. Customers "do not purchase our services until they qualify the services and satisfactorily complete factory audits and vendor evaluations"; qualification "may take three to six months or longer"; production is transferred "copy-exact: the setup of a production process identical to the one used by our customer"; and the filing's own experience of changing a component source is that it "resulted in our customers or their end customers requiring requalification and validation of components, a process that can often be lengthy and has negatively impacted the timing of our revenue" — the same friction a customer would face moving the program elsewhere. The filing rules out an IP-based moat itself: "Historically, patents have not played a significant role in the protection of our proprietary rights," and any process improvement developed for a customer's product is "immediately assigned to that customer." The Thailand cost base is a genuine advantage but the filing warns it is not durable on its own — "Wage increases may impact our ability to sustain our competitive advantage and may reduce our profit margin."

source: sec.gov

Leadership 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.

source: sec.gov

fast follower

IDC's 1Q26 Worldwide Quarterly Enterprise Storage Systems Tracker, as reported by Blocks & Files on 2026-06-16 (the source of the array row below), ranks Everpure third in external enterprise storage behind Dell and NetApp and ahead of Huawei and HPE, noting "Everpure moved into third position helped by subscription model adoption and AI-optimized platforms." By the company's own account it ranks higher on the qualitative axis: its Q2 FY2027 results release of 2026-08-26 (https://s21.q4cdn.com/687136699/files/doc_financials/2027/q2/Q2FY2027-Earnings-Press-Release.pdf) reports it was "Named a Leader in the 2026 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ for Enterprise Storage Platforms, positioned highest in execution and furthest in vision for the second consecutive year" - the company's own summary of Gartner's opinion. Third by IDC's independent revenue ranking, with the higher Gartner placement resting on the company's own account, reads as a close follower to Dell and NetApp rather than a shared lead.

source: sec.gov

co leader

The leadership claim in the filing is the company's own qualitative assessment: "We believe we are a leader in manufacturing products for the optical communications market," and, on breadth of process technology, "Based on our experience with customers and our qualitative assessment of our capabilities, we believe we provide a broader array of process technologies to the optics industry than any other manufacturing services provider." The same Item 1 names a crowded field against it — "Benchmark Electronics, Inc., Celestica Inc., InnoLight Technology (Suzhou) Ltd., Jabil Inc., Sanmina Corporation, Venture Corporation Limited and Eoptolink Technology Inc., Ltd., as well as the internal manufacturing capabilities of our customers" — and no independent share ranking is given, so the record supports front-of-field standing but not sole primacy.

source: sec.gov

Pricing power 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."

source: sec.gov

moderate

It can pass costs through but not escape them. The 10-K's income statement reports gross profit of $2,021.2M, $2,212.7M and $2,578.0M on revenue of $2,830.6M, $3,168.2M and $3,662.8M for FY2024-FY2026. When component costs rose, the 10-K says "we raised our prices during the first quarter of fiscal year 2027", and the Q2 FY2027 results release (https://s21.q4cdn.com/687136699/files/doc_financials/2027/q2/Q2FY2027-Earnings-Press-Release.pdf) quotes the CFO: "Demand remains strong across our solutions portfolio despite historic industry price increases in the first half of FY'27." Those were industry-wide increases, though, and margin still slipped: GAAP gross margin was 68.4% in Q2 FY2027, against gross profit of $604.3M on $861.0M of revenue a year earlier. The 10-K adds that "ongoing component cost volatility has placed, and may continue to place, downward pressure on our gross margins" and that some competitors offer storage "at significant discounts or even for free".

source: sec.gov

weak

Gross profit was 12.0% of revenues in FY2026, 12.1% in FY2025 and 12.4% in FY2024 — flat to down across three years in which revenue grew from $2.88 billion to $4.64 billion — and the FY2026 increase in gross profit is attributed to "sales volume and product mix," not price. Item 1 says so directly: "we expect the prices we charge for our manufactured products to decrease over time (partly as a result of competitive market forces)," with the offset coming from cycle-time, mix, yield and material-cost work rather than from rate. The risk factors add that customer consolidation gives buyers "increased leverage that may result in, among other things, decreases in our average selling prices," and that new competition "could result in price reductions for our services, reduced gross profit margins or loss of market share."

source: sec.gov

Summary

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".

Everpure (renamed from Pure Storage) sells all-flash storage built on one design choice it has pursued since FlashArray, which the FY2026 10-K calls "the industry's first all-flash array": its own software manages raw NAND directly instead of going through commodity SSDs. The filing names three differentiators built on that choice and says the Purity operating environment is shared across FlashArray, FlashBlade and the Everpure Cloud services. The design is what let Everpure put dense QLC flash into enterprise arrays, and what won "the industry-first Flash design win with a major hyperscaler"; the company's Q2 FY2027 results release (2026-08-26) adds a second top-five hyperscaler win on the same DirectFlash architecture. Around the hardware sits Evergreen, which replaces controllers and flash modules in place so arrays do not need wholesale replacement, and a customer base the 10-K puts at over 14,500, including about 64% of the Fortune 500, with a certified NPS of 84. The 10-K's income statement reports gross profit of $2,021.2M on $2,830.6M of revenue in FY2024, $2,212.7M on $3,168.2M in FY2025 and $2,578.0M on $3,662.8M in FY2026. The limits are just as explicit. IDC's 1Q26 tracker ranks Everpure third in external enterprise storage, behind Dell and NetApp. The 10-K concedes that rivals have larger and more mature IP portfolios, that most prospects already run a competitor's storage and incumbents keep them partly through switching costs, and that public cloud providers "known for developing storage systems internally" reduce demand for systems like Everpure's. Component costs are the other exposure: the filing says the cost of components "increased significantly" in fiscal 2026, and that price increases in the first quarter of fiscal 2027 were meant "to help offset these rising expenses" while volatility keeps pressure on margins. A real, technology-based edge, held by a vendor that is third by revenue: narrow, not wide.

Fabrinet is the neutral outsourced factory for complex photonics. The FY2026 10-K describes a business that wins on qualification and IP hygiene rather than on product ownership: a "factory-within-a-factory" that physically segregates each customer's engineers and floor space, copy-exact line transfers, Telcordia-grade environmental qualification, and a claim that "there is no other manufacturing services provider with a similar breadth and depth of optical and electro-mechanical engineering and process technology capabilities that does not directly compete with its customers in their end-markets." That neutrality is claimed as a belief, not demonstrated — the filing's own framing is "we believe" — and Item 1 names the field it is measured against without characterising any of them: "Benchmark Electronics, Inc., Celestica Inc., InnoLight Technology (Suzhou) Ltd., Jabil Inc., Sanmina Corporation, Venture Corporation Limited and Eoptolink Technology Inc., Ltd., as well as the internal manufacturing capabilities of our customers." Once a program is qualified it tends to stay, and "in many cases, we are the sole outsourced manufacturing partner used by our customers for the products that we manufacture for them." What the moat does not buy is margin. Revenue grew 35.7% in FY2026 to $4.64 billion on the AI-datacenter build-out — data center products are now 47.9% of revenue — yet gross margin slipped to 12.0%, and Item 1 concedes the company expects "the prices we charge for our manufactured products to decrease over time." The two live erosion paths are named in the risk factors: customer consolidation that "may result in, among other things, decreases in our average selling prices," and customers who "acquired the capacity to manufacture products in-house." Concentration cuts both ways this year — FY2025 had two customers above 10% of revenue, FY2026 had four, so the book broadened even as its scale grew.

Chain position

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.

Everpure sits between the flash-memory supply and enterprise and hyperscale data centres. Upstream, the FY2026 10-K names "the cost of components, including flash and DRAM" as a gross-margin driver, says it must ensure "a sufficient supply of flash to support our hyperscaler customer", develops DirectFlash "In close collaboration with key QLC flash partners", and relies on contract manufacturers to build its products. Downstream it sells through a direct sales force and channel partners to enterprises, managed service providers and hyperscalers, and lists Microsoft Azure, AWS, Google, IBM, Cisco and NVIDIA among its technology partners; large public cloud providers are at once partners and, through internally developed storage, substitutes.

A contract manufacturer sitting between optical components and the network and AI-datacenter OEMs whose brands ship the finished box. FY2026 revenue is 47.9% data center, 33.3% communications infrastructure and 18.8% automotive, industrial and other markets (FY2025: 46.2% / 30.7% / 23.1%), with Cisco, NVIDIA, Nokia and Amazon each above 10% of revenue. Fabrinet also integrates one layer down, designing and fabricating its own customized optics and glass — crystals, ferrules, precision glass tubing — at Fuzhou, China and Mountain Lakes, New Jersey, both for its own assemblies and for the merchant market, while volume manufacturing runs from the Pinehurst and Chonburi campuses in Thailand.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Enterprise Agile Planning add-on Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • GitLab Dedicated (including Dedicated for Government) Unknown · Deep source: sec.gov
  • GitLab DevSecOps Platform (Free, Premium, and Ultimate tiers) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • GitLab Duo Agent Platform (with GitLab Credits) Unknown · Low source: about.gitlab.com
  • Self-Managed GitLab (on-premises and hybrid cloud deployment) Unknown · Deep source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.06 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 →

+0.05 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →