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.
| Microsoft | IREN | Oracle | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | wide The FY2026 10-K (filed 2026-07-29) restates both structural mechanisms verbatim. On cost: the cloud business 'benefits from three economies of scale' — datacenters with 'significantly lower cost per unit than smaller ones', demand aggregation, and multi-tenancy that lowers maintenance labor. On ecosystem: 'A well-established ecosystem creates beneficial network effects among users, application developers, and the platform provider that can accelerate growth.' Both are load-bearing at the new scale — 'Microsoft Cloud revenue increased 27% to $214.4 billion' and 'Commercial remaining performance obligation increased 84% to $678 billion.' Rated wide but held below full confidence because the same filing still cautions that 'Barriers to entry in many of our businesses are low.' | 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. | wide Oracle's FY2026 10-K (fiscal year ended May 31, 2026) describes an installed base in which "substantially all customers opt to purchase software support contracts when they purchase an Oracle software license"; that entrenchment shows up externally as the #1 DB-Engines database ranking (August 2026, first of 435 systems) and $638B of contracted Remaining Performance Obligations at Q4 FY2026 (press release, June 10, 2026) — a durable, multi-decade lock on mission-critical enterprise data layers. |
| Moat type | network effects The FY2026 10-K keeps the ecosystem passage scoped to the firm: 'An important element of our business model has been to create platform-based ecosystems on which many participants can build diverse solutions. A well-established ecosystem creates beneficial network effects among users, application developers, and the platform provider that can accelerate growth.' That remains the one moat mechanism the filing asserts about Microsoft as a whole; the cost-of-scale passage stays scoped to 'our cloud business'. | 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 The core moat is the cost of moving mission-critical databases and back-office suites: the FY2026 10-K notes substantially all license customers attach support contracts and that Oracle's Multicloud Database offerings run Oracle AI Database inside other hyperscalers' clouds — monetizing the installed base even when the customer's infrastructure leaves; the KLAS 2026 EHR report shows the same dynamic in health IT, where roughly a third of Oracle Health customers want to leave but feel unable to do so. |
| Leadership | co leader The FY2026 10-K asserts leadership nowhere. Its AI offerings 'compete with AI products from hyperscalers, as well as products from other emerging competitors and other open-source offerings, many of which are also current or potential partners' — one of a small set at hyperscale in cloud and AI, an incumbent in productivity and PC operating systems. | 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 Split by line: clear leader in database (DB-Engines August 2026 ranks Oracle #1 and Oracle-owned MySQL #2 of 435 systems); one of the largest enterprise-application vendors ($15.9B FY2026 SaaS revenue, competing with SAP, Salesforce, Workday and Microsoft per the FY2026 10-K); but in cloud infrastructure a ~4%-share fast-growing challenger behind Amazon (28%), Microsoft (20%) and Google (15%) per Synergy Q2 2026 data (The Register, 2026-08-01), and #2 in US acute-care EHR behind Epic (KLAS 2026). |
| Pricing power | strong The FY2026 10-K reports 'Gross margin increased $31.6 billion or 16% with growth across each of our segments', with 'Microsoft 365 Commercial revenue ... mainly affected by a combination of continued installed base growth and average revenue per user expansion'. The honest caveat: gross margin percentage 'decreased slightly driven by continued investments in AI infrastructure and growing AI product usage', with Microsoft Cloud gross margin down to 66%. | 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 Strong in the installed base — the FY2026 10-K states substantially all license customers purchase support contracts, a recurring stream customers rarely drop — but the same 10-K lists "total cost of ownership" first among key competitive factors and describes intense competition across every segment; AI-infrastructure deals are won against hyperscalers and neoclouds, and Q4 FY2026 SaaS grew a moderate 10% versus 93% for IaaS (press release, June 10, 2026). |
| Summary | One repeated model across segments — build a platform, attract developers and partners, monetize the ecosystem that forms — now compounding through the AI wave: FY2026 revenue rose 18 percent 'driven by growth in Microsoft Cloud', Azure and other cloud services grew 41 percent, and the commercial remaining performance obligation reached $678 billion, while the filing still concedes low barriers to entry in many businesses. | 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. | Oracle pairs the deepest switching-cost franchise in enterprise software — the #1-ranked database (DB-Engines, August 2026) plus Fusion/NetSuite back-office suites, with support attach near-universal per the FY2026 10-K — with a late but explosive push into AI cloud infrastructure: Q4 FY2026 IaaS revenue grew 93% to $5.8B and RPO reached $638B (up 363% YoY), mostly large-scale AI contracts (press release, June 10, 2026). The two reinforce each other via multicloud — Oracle Multicloud AI Database grew 404% in Q4 running inside rival clouds. The offsets: in cloud infrastructure Oracle is still a ~4%-share challenger behind AWS/Microsoft/Google (Synergy Q2 2026 data via The Register), the AI buildout drove FY2026 free cash flow to negative $23.7B, and the Cerner-based Oracle Health business has lost US hospital share for three straight years (KLAS 2026). |
| Chain position | Hyperscale AI-infrastructure buyer and platform distributor: monetizes upstream compute through Azure, Microsoft 365 Copilot, and the developer ecosystem. | 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). | Supply-chain role in AI: OCI sells GPU compute for AI training and inference — the Q4 FY2026 press release attributes most of the $85B sequential RPO increase to large-scale AI contracts (some with customer-prepaid or customer-supplied GPUs totaling $75B) and guides FY2027 total revenue to $90B — making Oracle a primary capacity supplier to AI model builders. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.35 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. | -0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.30 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. |