Skip to content

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.

comparing NetApp×IREN×CXMT× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
NetApp NTAP ai moat: latest change 2026-06-05 IREN IREN ai moat: latest change 2026-08-27 CXMT 688825.SS ai moat: latest change 2026-08-29
Moat rating narrow

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

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.

source: sec.gov

none

CXMT's 2026 interim report (published 2026-08-29) names scale and IDM technology as core competencies, but also concedes gaps. It says that compared with the leading international manufacturers the Company 'still has a certain gap in overall scale, technology accumulation and customer resources' (与国际头部厂商相比,公司在整体规模、技术积累、客户资源等方面仍然存在一定差距). It describes its scale effect as 'gradually emerging' (逐步显现), and its gross-margin risk covers the case where the scale effect cannot materialise over the long term (公司规模效应长期无法显现). Its excess returns span a single shortage. The retained-earnings note shows an accumulated deficit of ¥36.65bn entering 2026, after ¥1.87bn of 2025 net profit attributable to the parent, and the first-half 2025 net loss attributable to shareholders was ¥2.33bn. Then first-half 2026 revenue rose 873.64%, which the report attributes to the global DRAM supply shortage, higher prices and sharply higher volumes, and the main-business gross margin reached 84.84%.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

Moat type switching costs

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

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.

source: sec.gov

none

On the report's own evidence, no candidate moat source qualifies. Cost scale: the report calls DRAM a highly standardised product (高度标准化的产品) in which the cost advantage of scale is a core competency. But CXMT ranks fourth globally by capacity, and the report, calculating on sales, puts Samsung, SK hynix and Micron at 33.96%, 34.48% and 23.41% of the 2025 global DRAM market, so the scale advantage lies with the leaders. IP: it reports 4,484 domestic patents (3,744 of them invention patents) and 3,400 overseas patents as of 2026-06-30. Yet it describes its core technology as reaching 'international advanced level' (国际先进水平) and flags possible IP disputes with competitors. Switching costs: ¥133.48bn of ¥150.31bn first-half 2026 revenue went through distributors, who under the report's revenue note decide their own resale prices.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

Leadership co leader

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

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.

source: sec.gov

fast follower

TrendForce (2026-09-24) reports that CXMT's global DRAM revenue share rose to 9.5% in 2Q26 from 7.6% in 1Q26, 'placing it fourth behind Samsung at 39.4%, SK hynix at 24.9%, and Micron at 23.3%'. It is catching up through generation-skipping R&D. The interim report had its fifth process platform in customer certification, and a voluntary disclosure on 2026-09-21 announced that platform's mass production, adding that its products are not yet in scale sales and yields need time to ramp. TrendForce's listing analysis (2026-07-28) still says CXMT 'still trails Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron in advanced processes, product performance, yields, and certification by high-end customers'.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

Pricing power moderate

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

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.

source: sec.gov

weak

CXMT is a price taker riding the cycle. The interim report attributes first-half revenue growth to the global DRAM supply shortage, rising prices and sharply higher volumes. It records industry prices between 2015 and 2025 as high as $7.89/GB and as low as $1.78/GB in first-half 2023, and it states that the continued steep price rise is not sustainable. Main-business revenue was ¥15.22bn against cost of ¥13.29bn in first-half 2025, and ¥150.04bn against ¥22.75bn in first-half 2026. Most sales go through distributors, who set their own resale prices.

source: static.cninfo.com.cn

Summary

NetApp sells storage hardware but the asset is ONTAP, the data-management software that has run its arrays for over three decades and now also runs inside the three largest public clouds as a first-party service. The FY2026 10-K organises the company into two segments, Hybrid Cloud (AFF and ASA all-flash arrays, AFX for AI workloads, FAS hybrid-flash, E/EF-Series, StorageGRID object storage) and Public Cloud (Azure NetApp Files, Amazon FSx for NetApp ONTAP, Google Cloud NetApp Volumes, Cloud Volumes ONTAP), and states that both rest on the same ONTAP software. That is the whole argument: an enterprise that has standardised its snapshots, replication and multiprotocol access on ONTAP carries those habits with it when it moves workloads to a hyperscaler, and NetApp is paid on both sides of the move. The evidence that the lock has commercial value is the margin's steadiness: across the three years the FY2026 10-K reports, gross margin sat at 70.7%, 70.2% and 70.7% of revenue ($4,433M on $6,268M, $4,613M on $6,572M, $4,899M on $6,925M) while revenue grew, and the filing's own percentage-of-revenue table shows no mix shift doing that work - product and services held near 46% and 54% of revenue throughout. The limits are equally in the filing. NetApp is second, not first: IDC's 1Q26 tracker puts it behind Dell in external enterprise storage, and the 10-K's competition section concedes that cloud providers are simultaneously partners and rivals, that consumption models "may reduce overall demand for our traditional on-premises offerings sold through a capital expenditure (capex) model", and that alternative architectures "may reduce or eliminate demand for some of our offerings". Component exposure is real too: the filing discloses "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", and names NAND among the components whose supply can tighten. This is a durable second place built on software stickiness, not a structural monopoly.

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.

CXMT (ChangXin) is a Hefei-based IDM that designs and fabricates DDR5 and LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/5X/LPDDR6 memory and sells DRAM wafers, chips and modules. Its 2026 interim report says it reached its fourth process platform through a 'generation-skipping' (跳代研发) R&D strategy, and that it ranks first in China and fourth globally by shipments and sales. First-half 2026 revenue was ¥150.31bn (DDR series ¥69.47bn, LPDDR series ¥78.19bn), with a main-business gross margin of 84.84%. TrendForce puts its 2Q26 DRAM revenue share at 9.5%, up from 7.6% in 1Q26. The position is real but recent. The report concedes gaps to the three leaders in scale, technology and customers. The customers it names are Alibaba Cloud, ByteDance, Tencent, Lenovo, Xiaomi, Transsion, Honor, OPPO and vivo. On 2026-06-08 the US Defense Department added its subsidiary ChangXin Memory to the Section 1260H list. TrendForce notes that export controls leave CXMT relying on DUV multiple patterning rather than EUV, and that its prospectus 'has not disclosed a clear mass-production timetable' for HBM. The report itself warns that the continued steep rise in DRAM prices is not sustainable (价格的持续大幅上涨不具备可持续性) as international makers add capacity.

Chain position

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".

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).

Upstream DRAM IDM selling wafers, chips and modules to server, smartphone, PC and automotive makers, mostly through distributors (¥133.48bn of ¥150.31bn first-half 2026 revenue).

Products (share / barrier)
  • AI Cloud Services (bare metal and managed GPU compute) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • AI infrastructure software (Mirantis k0rdent AI) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • Bitcoin mining (in wind-down) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • Owned data centers and grid-connected power portfolio Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →