Compare moats

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.

source: sec.gov

Cipher (renamed Cipher Digital Inc. on 20 February 2026) holds signed, credit-supported leases but has not yet shown that they amount to a durable advantage. Its 2025 Form 10-K (filed 2026-02-24) says "Through the end of 2025, our revenue has been derived from mining bitcoin". Its Q2 2026 business update (2026-08-04, Exhibit 99.1, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819989/000181998926000038/q226_earningsxprxdraftxvf.htm) reported "Q2 2026 Revenue of $25 million", and its first HPC rent began only in August 2026 at Black Pearl. The 10-K's own risk factors describe a contested market. They say "There has been an increasing number of businesses constructing HPC data centers, which has resulted in increasing competition and pricing pressure that may cause us to reduce our pricing in order to remain competitive", that "our data centers are single-tenant properties", and that lessees "will have the right to terminate the lease if there are significant delays in the completion of construction". At Barber Lake, where the 10-K targeted Phase I delivery "by September 30, 2026", a September 2026 amendment, made "In connection with change orders and the continued evolution of tenant requirements", moved data-hall deliveries to the fourth quarter of 2026 through the first quarter of 2027. Under it, Cipher "will bear the first $359.3 million of costs in excess of the initial budgeted amount" (2026-09-25). There is real counter-evidence: a 15-year Amazon lease, a Google-backstopped Fluidstack lease whose contracted life a "leading AI lab" extended to 20 years, and a third lease with an investment-grade hyperscale tenant. Until that capacity is delivered and paying rent, though, a moat is not shown, so the band is none.

source: sec.gov

The FY2025 10-K (filed 2026-02-11) grounds the advantage in an asset that took 27 years to assemble and that a competitor cannot buy: "Over our 27-year history, we have curated a diverse, industry-leading ecosystem of more than 500,000 interconnections", "over 10,500 customers, including 2,000+ network service providers and a leading market share of cloud-on ramps", across "280 data centers, in 77 markets in 36 countries", with "99.9999%+ operational uptime" delivered in 2025 and no single customer at 10% of revenue. Because the value of each IBX rises with who else is already inside it, incumbency compounds rather than decays. The counterweight is real and disclosed: Item 1A says "The global multi-tenant data center market is highly fragmented. It is estimated that we are one of more than 2,400 companies that provide these offerings around the world", and warns that competitors "may adopt aggressive pricing policies". That caps the pricing that the moat converts into, not its durability — the fragmentation sits in commodity space-and-power, while the interconnection density the filing describes has no comparable substitute. FY2025 revenue of $9.217B with operating margin recovering to 20.0% from 15.2% in FY2024 is consistent with the incumbency holding.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

No moat source is demonstrated yet. Switching costs are the most likely candidate, since the leases are long (15 years at Black Pearl; Barber Lake now a 20-year contracted life) and each site has a single tenant. But the 10-K says tenant guarantees "will only be effective after rent commencement under such leases and are subject to certain limitations", and by August 2026 rent had begun at only one site. The advantages the 10-K claims are the company's own. It speaks of "industry-leading expertise in originating and securing industrial-scale, greenfield data center sites" and of securing West Texas land "on more favorable terms than in more established data center markets". The same document says "there is significant competition for power capacity and energized facilities". Intellectual property is modest: "four granted United States patents and one issued patent in Taiwan". With 66 full-time employees, Cipher has no scale advantage over the competitors it names: CoreWeave, Digital Realty, Equinix, Vantage Data Centers and Aligned Data Centers.

source: sec.gov

The 10-K names the mechanism itself, twice and unprompted: "As more customers choose Equinix for high connectivity and performance reliability at the metro edge, it benefits their suppliers and business partners to colocate in the same data centers and connect directly with each other. This adjacency creates a network effect that attracts new customers while continuously enhancing our value proposition to existing customers", and in the Competitive Landscape section, "This ecosystem creates a network effect that improves performance and lowers the cost for our customers". The evidence is the count of participants rather than any patent or unit-cost claim — 500,000+ interconnections, 2,000+ network service providers, a leading share of cloud on-ramps, an Internet Exchange the filing calls "the largest global peering solution". Switching costs are a genuine second layer (fixed-duration contracts billed on space and power, physical cross connects into resident counterparties), but they are what holds a customer already inside the ecosystem; the reason to enter in the first place is who is already there.

source: sec.gov

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".

source: sec.gov

No independent share or rank was found. The 10-K names CoreWeave, Digital Realty, Equinix, Vantage Data Centers and Aligned Data Centers as competitors, along with miners that have "signed leases with hyperscalers and HPC tenants": Hut 8, IREN, TeraWulf, Core Scientific and Applied Digital. Cipher has signed hyperscale-grade tenants (Amazon; Fluidstack with a Google backstop; a third investment-grade hyperscaler) but delivered its first HPC capacity only in August 2026 (Q2 2026 update). That makes it a fast follower. Its self-description as "a leading developer, owner, and operator of industrial-scale data centers" is the company's own claim and is not counted.

source: sec.gov

Leadership is claimed on interconnection, not on square footage, and the filing's own evidence is about density: "our position is unmatched in the industry" is supported by 2,000+ resident network service providers, "a leading market share of cloud-on ramps", 500,000+ interconnections and an Internet Exchange described as "the largest global peering solution", across 36 countries. The band is read against neutral, ecosystem-dense colocation, where that footprint has no direct analogue. It is deliberately not read against total data centre capacity: the same 10-K puts Equinix among "more than 2,400 companies" in a "highly fragmented" MTDC market, and Item 1A concedes the company must compete for land and power against "new market entrants" drawn in by AI.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

The 10-K says competition "has resulted in increasing competition and pricing pressure that may cause us to reduce our pricing in order to remain competitive". It adds that if customers cut usage "we may be compelled to lower our prices or risk losing a significant customer". At Barber Lake, Cipher agreed to absorb "the first $359.3 million of costs in excess of the initial budgeted amount", with the tenant reimbursing "50% of any such costs above that amount" (2026-09-25, Exhibit 99.1, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819989/000181998926000043/barberlakeleaseamendmentpr.htm). Its one input-cost edge is specific to mining: Odessa's power costs about 2.8 c/kWh under the Luminant contract, available "until at least July 2027". A landlord that concedes cost overruns to its tenants has weak pricing power.

source: sec.gov

Contract structure supports price: fixed-duration agreements billed on space and power plus per-connection interconnection fees, an installed base too physically entangled to move cheaply, and 99.9999%+ uptime in 2025 as the thing being paid for. FY2025 revenue of $9.217B grew about 5% on FY2024's $8.748B while operating margin recovered to 20.0% from 15.2%, so pricing and cost were at least held. But the filing itself refuses the strong band: competitors "may adopt aggressive pricing policies, especially if they are not highly leveraged or have lower return thresholds than we do. As a result, we may suffer from pricing pressure that would adversely affect our ability to generate revenues", and some rivals bundle communications or cloud services against bare colocation. Power procurement is a further pass-through risk the filing flags. Price is defended, not dictated.

source: sec.gov

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".

Cipher develops single-tenant, powered data-centre campuses for hyperscale and AI tenants: Amazon at Black Pearl, Fluidstack (backstopped by Google) at Barber Lake, and an unnamed investment-grade hyperscaler at a third campus. Meanwhile it winds down bitcoin mining.

Equinix is the neutral meeting point of the AI and cloud supply chain rather than a link in its manufacturing path: it houses other companies' compute and sells the adjacency between them. The 10-K places it between the network layer (2,000+ service providers), the cloud layer ("a leading market share of cloud-on ramps") and enterprise consumers who "assemble these capabilities into operational stacks", and describes an AI ecosystem "of model providers, data platforms, neoclouds and gateways" curated for enterprise AI demand. Core hyperscale training capacity sits beside that, not inside it, in xScale, built with JV partners so hyperscalers "add to their core hyperscale data center deployments and existing customer access points at Equinix". The revenue is therefore levered to AI's distribution and inference edge more than to training-cluster buildout.

• AFF and ASA all-flash storage arrays Top 3 · Moderate source: blocksandfiles.com
• Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP Leader · Deep source: docs.aws.amazon.com
• Azure NetApp Files Leader · Deep source: learn.microsoft.com
• NetApp AFX and AI Data Engine Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• NetApp Keystone Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• NetApp StorageGRID Niche · Low source: sec.gov

• Bitcoin mining (Odessa) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
• HPC data center leasing (Black Pearl, Barber Lake, Stingray) Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov

• Equinix Cross Connects Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• Equinix Fabric Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Equinix Internet Exchange Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• IBX Colocation (Private Cages and Secure Cabinets) Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• xScale Data Centers Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →