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.
| Intel | Everpure, Inc. | NetApp | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | eroding The FY2025 10-K (filed 2026-01-23) repeats the concession, now broadened: 'we have lost market share in recent years, including in both client and data center markets, in the market for x86-based semiconductor products, and more generally in the markets for semiconductor compute products, as competitors have introduced highly competitive data center and client platform products.' It adds that the data-center business 'has been further negatively impacted in the past few years by the significant shift of customer spend toward GPUs optimized for AI workloads' — a historically wide moat still actively eroding. | 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. | 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. |
| Moat type | intangibles ip The durable assets remain the x86 architecture and process-technology IP: the FY2025 10-K claims 'We are a global leader in the design and manufacturing of CPUs and other semiconductor products' and stakes the recovery on process IP — 'Intel 18A introduces two industry firsts in high-volume semiconductor manufacturing: gate-all-around transistors (RibbonFET) and backside power delivery (PowerVia).' | 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. | 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. |
| Leadership | fast follower The FY2025 10-K still opens 'We are a global leader in the design and manufacturing of CPUs', yet concedes lost share 'in both client and data center markets' and a spend shift 'toward GPUs optimized for AI workloads' where Intel participates via 'Xeon, AI PCs, Arc GPUs and our open software stack' plus 'inference-optimized GPUs on a targeted annual cadence' — following the AI compute market rather than setting its pace. | 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. | 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". |
| Pricing power | weak The FY2025 10-K states the mechanism itself: higher-priced products 'have lower margins as they are produced at external foundries rather than in our manufacturing facilities. To the extent demand shifts from our higher-margin to lower-margin products in any of our market segments, our gross margin percentage has decreased and may decrease again' — plus $878 million of 2025 inventory reserves on the early Intel 18A ramp. | 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". | 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. |
| Summary | Still the incumbent x86 CPU designer-manufacturer — FY2025 revenue was $52.9 billion, roughly flat — but the filing concedes lost share in client and data center and an AI-driven customer shift toward GPUs; the counter-thesis is process IP, with Intel 18A shipping in Core Ultra Series 3 ('the first products to be manufactured using our new Intel 18A process technology') and Intel 14A 'designed from inception as an offering to external customers.' | 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. | 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. |
| Chain position | x86 compute incumbent and would-be US leading-edge foundry; its 18A/14A ramp is the main Western alternative to TSMC at the leading edge. | 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. | 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". |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | -0.24 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |