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.
| IREN | GitLab | Applied Materials | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | none The FY2026 10-K (filed 2026-08-27) shows IREN holds an input the industry competes on: it names 'access to secured and energized power' first among what it believes are the principal competitive factors in its industry, and reports 'executed grid connection agreements, letters of agreement or equivalents representing approximately 5GW of total power capacity' in the United States, Canada, Spain and Australia as of June 30, 2026. It does not claim an advantage over rivals in that input. It says 'Certain competitors may have access to more competitively priced power, a greater access to power and a better capacity to timely secure grid connections,' and 'Many of our competitors have greater financial, technical or commercial resources, longer cloud operating histories or larger customer bases, compared to us.' Operating AI Cloud Services capacity was approximately 40MW at June 30, 2026, and the stored XBRL fundamentals from this 10-K show an FY2026 operating loss of about $1,046.7M on revenue of about $707.0M, so no durable advantage is yet demonstrated. | 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 2025-12-12) grounds a wide moat on three reinforcing pillars: (1) scale IP — 'more than 23,500 active patents in the United States and other countries' and $3.57B of fiscal 2025 RD&E spend that 'must generally enable us to deliver new products and technologies before the emergence of strong demand'; (2) portfolio breadth — 'the semiconductor capital equipment industry's most comprehensive portfolio of products', letting Applied 'combine, co-optimize and integrate our technologies to develop highly differentiated solutions'; (3) an installed-base annuity — the AGS segment monetizes 'our large, global installed base of semiconductor and other equipment' with transactional and subscription services, spares and factory automation software, carrying a $7,141M backlog (48% of the company's $15,002M total) at fiscal year-end 2025. Company gross margin expanded three straight years (46.7% FY2023, 47.5% FY2024, 48.7% FY2025) while this played out. |
| Moat type | none The FY2026 10-K's asserted advantage is control from owning its data centers, 'including the associated land, grid connections and substations', which it believes allows it 'to benefit from more sustainable cash flows and operational flexibility relative to operators that rely upon third-party colocation services or short-term land leases'. Its only scale language is a belief that its 'procurement scale, deployment experience and direct control over the data center layer' lets it bring new compute into service 'rapidly and at scale', a deployment-speed claim, and it 'generally target[s]' regions with 'low-cost and attractive renewable energy sources', a siting target rather than a demonstrated cost position. It does not claim a cost or scale lead: it says 'Many of our competitors are larger, have longer operating histories and significantly greater resources than we do' and that certain competitors 'may have access to more competitively priced power, a greater access to power and a better capacity to timely secure grid connections.' There is no network effect or lock-in either, since existing contracts have 'terms ranging from month to month up to five years'. No enumerated moat source is grounded. | 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." | intangibles ip The 10-K itself names IP as the competitive foundation: 'Protection of our technology assets through enforcement of our intellectual property rights, including patents, is important for our competitive position', backed by 'more than 23,500 active patents' plus trademarks, know-how, trade secrets and copyrights, and $3,570M of fiscal 2025 RD&E ($3,042M inside Semiconductor Systems alone). A strong secondary switching-cost layer is also documented: the risk factors cite the difficulty of 'securing development-tool-of-record (DTOR) and production-tool-of-record (PTOR) positions with customers' as a decisive competitive factor — once a tool is the record tool for a node, displacement is the exception — and AGS service/spares revenue is tied to the installed base. |
| Leadership | behind The 10-K lists IREN's competitors as hyperscalers (Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, Oracle Cloud) and specialized AI Cloud Services providers (CoreWeave, Nebius, Crusoe, Lambda, Nscale, SpaceX and others). It says IREN began providing AI Cloud Services in 2024 and cites its 'shorter operating history in AI Cloud Services relative to some competitors', and states 'Some of our competitors have longer operating histories, larger customer bases, more comprehensive IP portfolios and patent protections, more design wins, and greater financial, sales, marketing and distribution resources than we do.' Operating AI Cloud Services capacity was approximately 40MW at June 30, 2026. The filing describes a smaller, later entrant that trails some competitors on operating history, customer base and resources, with its progress so far resting on two anchor contracts (a ~$9.7B five-year Microsoft agreement and a ~$3.4B five-year NVIDIA contract) rather than any claimed category position. | 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 Self-declared basis, not an independent rank: the 10-K's opening sentence claims Applied 'is the leader in the materials engineering solutions used to produce virtually every semiconductor in the world' and repeatedly claims 'the semiconductor capital equipment industry's most comprehensive portfolio'. The filing names no competitor and states no market-share figure — it acknowledges rivals ranging 'from small companies that compete in a single region... to global, diversified companies' and says only that 'many of our products have strong competitive positions'. Leadership claim is scoped to materials engineering (Applied sells no lithography). |
| Pricing power | weak The 10-K's risk factors state 'Our competitors' products, services and technologies may be cheaper or provide better functionality or features than ours, which has resulted and may in the future result in lower-than-expected selling prices or demand for our products.' They also say long-term contract pricing 'is generally fixed or agreed at the time of contracting', so if market pricing for comparable capacity rises during a contract's term 'we will not benefit from those increases with respect to capacity already committed under our existing long-term contracts', and that if customers suffer a downturn or discontinue its services it 'may be compelled to offer more flexible terms, lower our prices or risk losing a significant customer.' The stored XBRL fundamentals from this 10-K show FY2026 revenue of about $707.0M against an operating loss of about $1,046.7M, so there is no margin record yet that evidences 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." | strong MD&A attributes the FY2025 gross-margin expansion explicitly to price: margin rose 1.2 points to 48.7% 'primarily driven by higher net revenue, favorable changes in customer and product mix, an increase in average selling prices, and lower material and manufacturing costs' — the third consecutive annual increase (46.7% FY2023, 47.5% FY2024, 48.7% FY2025), with Semiconductor Systems segment gross margin at 54.2%. Counterweight from the same filing: a 'highly concentrated customer base' (two customers ~19% and ~15% of net revenue) whose members 'may seek pricing, payment, intellectual property-related, or other commercial terms that are less favorable to us'. |
| Summary | Per its FY2026 10-K, IREN is a vertically integrated AI Cloud Services platform that owns the data center, compute and software layers, underpinned by executed grid connection agreements, letters of agreement or equivalents representing ~5GW and a further multi-GW development pipeline. Its commercial record is concentrated: a five-year Microsoft agreement (~$9.7B total contract value, Horizon 1 delivered and accepted in August 2026, Horizons 2-4 targeted for delivery in phases in calendar Q4 2026) and a five-year ~$3.4B NVIDIA cloud contract together make up a substantial majority of contracted revenue. It holds NVIDIA Preferred Partner and Exemplar Cloud status (HGX B300 and GB300 NVL72) and a strategic partnership intended to support the deployment over time of up to 5GW of NVIDIA DSX-aligned infrastructure, which the filing cites among arrangements that are non-binding or subject to conditions, with no assurance as to the extent of deployments. Against that, the filing names hyperscaler and specialized competitors (AWS, Google Cloud, Azure, Oracle, CoreWeave, Nebius, Crusoe, Lambda, Nscale, SpaceX), many of which it says have greater resources, customers that can use or develop their own solutions, and possible delays to Texas energization from changes to ERCOT's Batch Zero procedures, so the power position is not a demonstrated advantage over rivals and its value depends on execution. | 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". | Applied Materials describes itself in its FY2025 10-K as 'the leader in the materials engineering solutions used to produce virtually every semiconductor in the world', selling wafer-fab equipment across patterning, transistor and interconnect fabrication (deposition/etch for 3D transistors), optical and eBeam process control, and advanced packaging. Fiscal 2025 net revenue was $28,368M: Semiconductor Systems $20,798M at a 54.2% gross margin (up from 52.9% FY2024 and 52.0% FY2023), AGS services $6,385M, and Corporate and Other (including display equipment) $1,185M. Within Semiconductor Systems, foundry/logic was 67% of revenue, DRAM 26%, NAND 7%. The moat mechanics the filing documents: 23,500+ active patents and $3.57B annual RD&E that must land tools with customers 'during early-stage technology selection'; DTOR/PTOR tool-of-record incumbency (cited in risk factors as the hard-to-win competitive position); and an AGS installed-base annuity whose backlog ($7,141M) now rivals the equipment backlog. The filing is equally clear about the moat's edges: 'Substantial competition exists across all the segments of our business'; two customers were approximately 19% and 15% of fiscal 2025 net revenue; ~89% of revenue is from outside the United States; and U.S. export controls on China 'have limited the market for certain of our products and services, adversely impacted our revenues and increased our exposure to foreign and Chinese domestic competition'. |
| Chain position | Downstream AI-cloud operator: owns grid-connected data centers and deploys NVIDIA/AMD GPU systems it rents to hyperscalers, frontier labs, AI developers and enterprises (anchor customers Microsoft and NVIDIA). | 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. | Upstream chokepoint of the AI-compute supply chain: Applied's tools fabricate chips for 'artificial intelligence (AI) and data center servers' among other end markets, selling into foundry/logic (67% of Semiconductor Systems revenue), DRAM (26%) and NAND (7%). Concentration cuts both ways — two customers were ~19% and ~15% of FY2025 net revenue, ~89% of revenue is non-U.S., and the customer base is 'geographically concentrated, particularly in China, Taiwan and Korea', with U.S. export controls on China constraining the addressable market and feeding Chinese domestic-equipment competition (all per the FY2025 10-K). |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | -0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.42 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. |