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 | Qualcomm | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Qualcomm's advantage is real but concentrated in one segment. The FY2025 10-K (filed 2025-11-05) describes its portfolio as "the most widely and extensively licensed in the industry" and says the industry "generally recognizes that any company seeking to develop, manufacture and/or sell certain cellular products requires a license or other rights to use our patents". That licensing leg produced $5,582M of FY2025 revenue against $38,367M at QCT, where Apple, Samsung and Xiaomi are all named in the vertical-integration risk factor and Apple already "utilizes its own modem... in certain of its smartphones". The filing frames the QCT loss as expected rather than realised. |
| 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. | intangibles ip The durable asset is intellectual property accumulated since Qualcomm's founding "in 1985". The patents have "broad coverage in many countries, including Brazil, China, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the United States and countries in Europe" and are licensed "to hundreds of companies on industry-accepted terms", with royalties set as "a percentage of the wholesale (i.e., licensee's) selling price... subject to per unit minimums and/or per unit caps". R&D of $9,042M equalled 20% of revenues. Manufacturing is fabless "other than for certain of our RFFE modules and RF filter products", for which Qualcomm owns fabs in Germany and Singapore. |
| 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. | co leader Leadership is clear in licensing and contested in silicon. The 10-K names no rival licensing programme and asserts the portfolio is "the most widely and extensively licensed in the industry", while calling QCT's industries "intensely competitive" and naming eleven competitors (Broadcom, HiSilicon, MediaTek, Mobileye, Nvidia, NXP, Qorvo, Samsung, Skyworks, TI, UNISOC); "continue to be a leader in mobile" appears in a list of things future success depends on, so it reads as aspiration, not share. The band therefore rests on the licensing leg, roughly 13% of revenue. FY2025 10%-plus customers were 21%, 20% and 13%; in 9M FY2026 only two cleared 10%. |
| 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 QTL margins held at 72% in FY2025 and 73% in 9M FY2026, though Q3 FY2026 alone slipped to 69% from 71%, and the $111M revenue gain there is attributed to revenues per unit "primarily driven by favorable mix" rather than to price. At QCT, the fall to 26% from 30% is explained by "lower gross margin, primarily driven by higher product cost, partially offset by higher average selling prices" plus lower revenues, so the pressure is cost rather than price; FY2025 handsets rose $2,930M, of which $2.5B came from higher revenue per chipset. Against that, "declining average selling prices" is a standing risk-factor title, "particularly pronounced in emerging regions and China". |
| 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. | Qualcomm has two legs pointing in opposite directions. QTL (FY2025 revenue $5,582M, EBT margin 72%) rests on a portfolio the 10-K calls "the most widely and extensively licensed in the industry", with royalties struck on the licensee's wholesale device price under per-unit minimums and caps; its durability is dated in the filing, since "our patent license agreements with key OEMs are generally long-term, with terms expiring at varying dates between fiscal 2027 and 2031", some with binding-arbitration renewal clauses, and Huawei's licence has already expired, removing its royalties from QTL revenue from Q2 FY2025. QCT ($38,367M, 87% of segment revenue) is the leg under pressure: its three 10%-plus customers all build their own silicon, Apple already ships its own modem, and QCT EBT margin fell to 26% in Q3 FY2026 from 30%. |
| 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). | Every figure and quotation is drawn from the FY2025 10-K and the Q3 FY2026 10-Q. Where the filings state no market share, the share band is left unknown rather than inferred, and barrier bands follow the filings' own language, which states a barrier to entry only for automotive. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | -0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish Editorial prior, not backtested. |