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

Narrow, not wide, because the FY2026 10-K documents a strong installed base and a competitive position the company itself says is under erosion. On the asset side: revenue of $4.7 billion (29% growth in each of the last three fiscal years), 13,328 total customers up from 10,996, 790 of the Forbes Global 2000 contributing about 43% of revenue, 733 customers above $1 million in trailing-12-month product revenue up from 576, a 125% net revenue retention rate, and more than 1,050 issued U.S. patents. Against that, Item 1A states plainly that adopting open data formats like Apache Iceberg means 'there is less customer “lock in” when our products are used in external environments' and that 'our support of open data formats may also reduce switching costs between us and our competitors'; that AWS, Azure and GCP 'generally compete in all of our markets' while also supplying the infrastructure a 'substantial majority of our business is run on'; and that the company remains loss-making at $1.3 billion of net loss for the year.

source: sec.gov

The FY2025 10-K supports a real but bounded advantage. The Competition section says the company believes "mRNA as a medicine coupled with our capabilities across mRNA technology, drug discovery, development and manufacturing provide us with a competitive advantage," and the Intellectual Property section backs that with more than 260 issued or allowed U.S. patents or applications, more than 140 granted or allowed outside the U.S., 485 pending applications, and latest-to-expire granted patents on all three approved products projected to 2041 in the U.S. and 2036 in Europe. Item 1A cuts the band down from wide: it opens the competition risk with "The vaccine market, and pharmaceutical market more generally, is intensely competitive," says Moderna "ha[s] been excluded from selling our COVID vaccines in many European markets due to a competitor's contract with the European Commission, which does not lapse until year-end 2026," that in RSV it "entered a market already occupied by two larger competitors," and that rivals "have exploited and may in the future exploit their greater size, infrastructure, resources and experience." The same section reports net losses of $2.8 billion in 2025 and $3.6 billion in 2024 against 2025 total revenue of $1.9 billion.

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

The filing makes its own affirmative claim of network effects — 'Our business benefits from powerful network effects. ... The more customers adopt our platform, the more data can be exchanged with other Snowflake customers, partners, data providers, and data consumers' — but the load-bearing, quantified evidence in the document points to switching costs. The platform is sold as the way to 'consolidate data into a single source of truth,' and the disclosed economics of that consolidation are a 125% net revenue retention rate and 733 customers above $1 million in trailing product revenue. Item 1A confirms the mechanism by naming what is at risk: open formats produce 'less customer “lock in”' and 'may also reduce switching costs.' The filing frames lock-in, not network density, as the thing erosion would take away.

source: sec.gov

The filing locates the advantage in a patent and know-how estate, not in customer lock-in or cost. Intellectual Property describes "an expansive, multi-layered IP estate" whose platform claims cover mRNA chemistry, sequence optimization, engineering elements, LNP delivery systems and "innovative processes for the manufacture and analysis of mRNA drug substance and formulated drug product," alongside "substantial proprietary know-how associated with related manufacturing processes" and a trademark portfolio of at least 1,400 registrations. Nothing in the filing claims switching costs or a cost advantage; Item 1A says the opposite, that competitors leverage "larger supply chains and greater purchasing power."

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

The 10-K contains no ranking, market-share figure, or claim of leadership, and it names no non-hyperscaler competitor by name. The band rests on disclosed scale — $4.7 billion of revenue, 13,328 customers, 9,060 employees across 36 countries — set against the filing's own statement that 'many of our competitors have substantially greater brand recognition, customer relationships, and financial, technical, and other resources than we do.' Co-leader among independent cloud data platforms; not a leader over AWS, Azure and GCP, which the filing says compete in all of its markets.

source: sec.gov

The Business section opens with the company's own claim that "Moderna is a pioneer and leader in the field of mRNA medicine." The Competition section frames the commercial reality more narrowly as a contest against a small named set: "We largely compete against Pfizer and BioNTech for sales of our COVID vaccines, whose vaccine is also based on mRNA technology. We also compete against other vaccines, including Sanofi and Novavax's." It does not claim a rank anywhere, and it places Moderna behind in the other approved category: in RSV "we compete against Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline, who entered the U.S. market prior to us, and our RSV sales have been minimal to date."

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 consumption model plus 125% net revenue retention shows real expansion pricing, and the filing argues it competes on 'pricing transparency and optimized price-performance.' But Item 1A limits how far that goes: competition 'may negatively impact our ability to acquire new customers ... put downward pressure on our prices and gross margins'; the company 'may not be able to ... offer as many discounts or free services as our competitors'; results depend on 'changes in our pricing model, including in response to significant price discounts by our competitors' and on 'customer optimization efforts that result in reduced consumption.' On the cost side, 'our costs and gross margins are significantly influenced by the prices we are able to negotiate with these public cloud providers, which in certain cases are also our competitors.'

source: sec.gov

Item 1A states that "certain U.S. private vaccine market practices, including regarding discounts, rebates and returns, may cause us to realize significantly lower revenues than list prices," and that "in some instances, our competitors have been able to offer more attractive terms than we can, and they may continue to do so in the future." On the flu candidate it says that in a well-developed market Moderna "may need to offer more favorable terms to gain market share (which we may be unable to do), which may negatively impact our profitability." The Commercial section adds that its markets are "characterized, particularly in the U.S. (our largest market), by a fragmented end customer base, unpredictability in orders and seasonality of deliveries."

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".

Sits at the enterprise data and governance layer of the AI stack, and the AI exposure is explicit rather than incidental: the filing brands the product the 'AI Data Cloud,' lists AI as a product category, and put Snowflake Intelligence, Cortex Agents and a Managed MCP Server into general availability during the fiscal year. It is a buyer of hyperscaler compute and of third-party frontier models — 'strategic partnerships with foundational model providers deliver state-of-the-art models natively within Snowflake Cortex AI,' with stated 'model neutrality' — and a supplier of governed enterprise data and GPU-backed managed compute to AI applications built on top.

A vertically integrated mRNA developer-manufacturer that sits between upstream licensors and government or retail buyers: it in-licenses the Penn modified-mRNA patents non-exclusively through Cellscript and mRNA RiboTherapeutics at low-single-digit royalties and NIAID's prefusion coronavirus spike and prefusion RSV F patents, manufactures drug substance at the owned Norwood MTC campus and individualized therapy at Marlborough, runs Moderna-built plants in the UK, Canada and Australia against multi-year government purchase commitments, and relies on CMOs for critical raw material production and fill-finish.

• 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

• Analytics Top 3 · Deep source: sec.gov
• Data Engineering Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Cortex AI Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Marketplace and Data Collaboration Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Postgres and Unistore Niche · Low source: sec.gov
• Snowpark and Native Application Framework Niche · Moderate source: sec.gov

• Intismeran autogene (mRNA-4157) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Spikevax Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• mNEXSPIKE Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• mRESVIA Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• mRNA-1010 seasonal influenza vaccine Unknown · 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 →