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.
| Jabil | GitLab | |
|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | none Jabil's FY2025 10-K (fiscal year ended August 31, 2025) says it plainly: "Our business is highly competitive, and our manufacturing processes are generally not subject to significant proprietary protection." It adds that "The significant purchasing power and market power of these competitors, many of which are large companies, has and could increase pricing and competitive pressures for us", that some "have substantially greater manufacturing, research and development (R&D) and marketing resources", and that customers "are continually evaluating the merits of manufacturing products internally against the advantages of outsourcing". Stored fundamentals from the 10-Ks show gross profit of $2,867 million on $34,702 million of revenue in fiscal 2023, $2,676 million on $28,883 million in fiscal 2024 and $2,646 million on $29,802 million in fiscal 2025. AI demand has since accelerated growth (fiscal 2026 net revenue of $36.0 billion, per the 2026-09-30 release), but growth is not protection, and the filing's own description is of an unprotected, competitive service. No moat is claimable. | 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. |
| Moat type | none The 10-K says "We currently have a relatively modest number of patents for various innovations" and that Jabil relies "largely upon a combination of intellectual property laws, non-disclosure agreements with our customers, employees, and suppliers and our internal security systems, policies, and procedures", with other proprietary-rights factors being "the knowledge and experience of our management and workforce". Its stated advantages are operating methods (customer-dedicated business units, "highly automated, continuous flow manufacturing", global production and centralized procurement), not lock-in: "In the past, some of our customers moved a portion of their manufacturing from us in order to more fully utilize their excess internal manufacturing capacity." On the Q4 FY2026 call (https://earningswhispers.com/transcript/JBL/Q42026) management described a build-to-customer-design model rather than proprietary platforms: "We help customers build the system they've designed with their silicon, their architecture, and whichever suppliers they choose." | 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." |
| Leadership | at parity The 10-K calls Jabil "one of the leading providers of engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain solutions" and claims no rank. Independently, EMSNOW/in4ma's "EMS&ODM Global 100" (2026-03-06, https://www.emsnow.com/?p=53535) groups Jabil with Flex, Celestica and Sanmina as the US "big four", "representing about 85% of the revenue base among ~20 US headquartered EMS/ODM", while Wistron, Quanta and Wiwynn "plus Foxconn together account for nearly 57% of global EMS/ODM production". The 10-K concedes some competitors have "substantially greater manufacturing, research and development (R&D) and marketing resources". Among the largest Western contract manufacturers but behind the Taiwanese leaders in scale: at parity, not a leader. | 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. |
| Pricing power | weak Stored fundamentals show gross profit of $2,867 million on $34,702 million of revenue in fiscal 2023, $2,676 million on $28,883 million in fiscal 2024 and $2,646 million on $29,802 million in fiscal 2025. The 10-K says "Most of our significant long-term customer contracts permit quarterly or other periodic prospective adjustments to pricing based on decreases and increases in component prices and other factors", so component costs largely pass through, while competitors may "be better positioned to compete on price for their services". Management's fiscal 2027 outlook is a core operating margin (non-GAAP) of 6.1% (release, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/898293/000162828026063890/jbl-20260930ex991.htm). | 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." |
| Summary | Jabil provides engineering, manufacturing and supply chain services through three segments. Per its FY2025 10-K, Intelligent Infrastructure serves "capital equipment, cloud and data center infrastructure, and networking and communications" customers; Regulated Industries serves automotive and transportation, healthcare and packaging, and renewables and energy infrastructure; and Connected Living and Digital Commerce is focused on "digitalization and automation, including warehouse automation and robotics". AI demand now drives growth: the fiscal 2026 release (2026-09-30) reports net revenue of $36.0 billion, with the CEO saying Jabil "grew revenue 21%, expanded core operating margin 40 basis points", and on the Q4 FY2026 call management said "AI-related revenue was up 60% year-over-year", that Jabil "ended the year with four customers with AI related revenue above a billion dollars annually", and that it expects cloud and data center infrastructure revenue of "approximately $17.5 billion" in fiscal 2027. The 10-K shows the limits: the five largest customers were approximately 36% of fiscal 2025 revenue and one customer, reported primarily in Intelligent Infrastructure, 16%; manufacturing processes are "generally not subject to significant proprietary protection"; and competitors may "be willing or able to make sales or provide services at lower margins than we do". An independent tally (EMSNOW/in4ma, 2026-03-06) counts Jabil among the US "big four" EMS providers while putting Foxconn, Wistron, Quanta and Wiwynn at "nearly 57% of global EMS/ODM production". A large, fast-growing contractor without a protected position. | 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". |
| Chain position | Contract manufacturer for cloud, networking, semiconductor-equipment, automotive, healthcare and consumer customers. On the Q4 FY2026 call management said "Others in the industry are building product companies around their own power and cooling platforms and asking customers to standardize on them. That's a legitimate model. Ours is different." | 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. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | -0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |