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×SoundHound AI×Applied Digital× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
NetApp NTAP ai moat: latest change 2026-06-05 SoundHound AI SOUN ai moat: latest change 2026-03-02 Applied Digital APLD ai moat: latest change 2026-07-29
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

narrow

The FY2025 10-K describes a real but limited edge: after an automotive design win a competing product may not be able to displace the winner because it is 'very unlikely that a customer will change complex technology until a product model is revamped', and it claims technical barriers to entry and cites over 359 granted and over 102 pending patents. The same filing concedes intense, price-sensitive competition from larger rivals that may be able to offer competing functionality 'at lower cost or free of charge' within larger offerings, possible pricing pressure from OEMs, master service agreements customers can terminate on six months to one year of prior written notice, and, to date, substantial net losses and negative cash flows from operating activities. The stickiness is real, but it has not yet produced profits.

source: sec.gov

none

The FY2026 10-K (filed 2026-07-29) shows contracted revenue, not a demonstrated competitive edge. About 1,410 MW is leased under 15-year take-or-pay, non-cancellable base terms worth about $36.2 billion, but only about 100 MW of the roughly 1.5 GW that is contracted and either operating or under construction was operating and earning revenue at May 31, 2026, and Item 1A says "lessees may have the right to terminate applicable leases if there are significant delays in construction." Item 1A also concedes "We do not have the resources to compete with larger providers of similar products or services at this time," and the Competition section names 13 power-advantaged developers the company competes with. Signed leases give revenue visibility, but the filing does not show a durable advantage.

source: sec.gov

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

switching costs

The stickiest advantage in the 10-K is design-win lock-in: a product that did not win an OEM or Tier-1 design may not be able to displace the winner until the customer begins a new selection process, because the 10-K says customers are very unlikely to change complex technology until a product model is revamped. Private domains make SoundHound a long-term "partner" (the 10-K's quotation marks) because subscribing customers retain the ability to iterate and update their content on its platform. Patents are the weaker source: the filing warns that competitors 'may independently develop technologies that are substantially the same or superior' without infringing its rights.

source: sec.gov

none

The 10-K claims three advantages: power-advantaged sites (it believes securing power and interconnection ahead of demand is 'the principal constraint on new HPC capacity and a core differentiator for us from many of our competitors'), a standardized 'franchise-style' design, and hyperscaler master service and master telecom service agreements 'that are difficult to obtain.' The filing does not show any of them to be durable. Its Competition section says competition 'centers on securing and developing sites with access to large-scale, reliable, and cost-competitive power and interconnection' and names 13 power-advantaged developers going after the same leases, and Item 1A concedes it lacks the resources to compete with larger providers. Signed leases are take-or-pay and non-cancellable, so a tenant leaving for convenience owes 'the full remaining contractual value,' but that is contractual lock-in on each lease rather than a moat source, so no moat type is assigned.

source: sec.gov

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 calls SoundHound 'a global leader in conversational intelligence' with 'best-in-class speed and accuracy', but these are the company's own claims and it gives no share figure. Apart from the company's own positioning, such as its belief that some legacy vendors offer dated technologies, the 10-K's comparisons with rivals run against SoundHound: some current or potential competitors are large technology companies that have 'significantly greater financial, technical and marketing resources than SoundHound does', they may be able to respond more rapidly to new or emerging technologies, and its large competitors may have greater access to customer data, which the 10-K says provides them with a competitive advantage in developing new products and technologies.

source: sec.gov

behind

The 10-K makes no leadership claim and gives no ranking or share figure. Item 1A concedes "We do not have the resources to compete with larger providers of similar products or services at this time" and that some rivals have "substantially greater liquidity and financial resources than we do." Its Competition section places APLD against established operators (Digital Realty, Equinix), hyperscalers that build their own capacity, independent developers and 13 named power-advantaged developers (IREN, Cipher Digital, TeraWulf, Hut 8, Riot, CleanSpark, HIVE, Core Scientific, Bitdeer, Galaxy Digital, Fermi, Keel Infrastructure, MARA).

source: sec.gov

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 flags price sensitivity among customers, rival alternatives offered 'at significantly lower costs or free of charge', and the strong purchasing power of major OEMs, under which SoundHound may be expected to quote fixed prices or be forced to accept annual price-reduction commitments. GAAP gross margin, computed from the 10-K's revenue and cost of revenue, fell from 75.4% (FY2023) to 48.9% (FY2024) and 42.4% (FY2025). The company attributes both declines primarily to acquisitions: the FY2024 10-K cites Amelia and SYNQ3, including SYNQ3's lower-margin call-center agent business and amortization of acquired intangibles, and the FY2025 10-K cites Amelia and Interactions, including $14.1M and $0.8M of amortization of acquired intangibles. Neither passage attributes the decline to pricing. The Q2 2026 release (8-K filed 2026-08-05) reports GAAP gross margin up 6.1 points year over year to 45.1%, with non-GAAP gross margin flat at 58.4%.

source: sec.gov

weak

Item 1A says "Due to the limited number of hyperscalers, we expect that a limited number of customers will continue to account for a high percentage of our revenue for the foreseeable future," and that if customers' equipment usage declines or they discontinue use of its facilities, APLD "may be compelled to lower our lease prices in some instances or risk losing a significant customer." One customer was 59% of FY2026 revenue from continuing operations. Take-or-pay, non-cancellable terms protect contracted revenue over the base term, and Note 19 reports a $39.1M HPC Hosting segment profit on $385.3M of segment revenue in FY2026, but those terms are agreed with a small group of concentrated buyers.

source: sec.gov

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.

SoundHound sells independent, white-label voice and agentic AI to carmakers, TV/IoT makers, restaurants and enterprises. Its 10-K pitches this as the alternative to big-tech assistants that take over a brand's users and data. Its defensibility rests mainly on automotive design wins, which the 10-K says customers are very unlikely to change until a product model is revamped. It layered on the Amelia (Aug 2024) and Interactions (Sep 2025) acquisitions, and it completed the LivePerson acquisition on 2026-09-04 per that day's 8-K, whose press release cites a strengthened IP portfolio of over 750 patents. Against that, the 10-K lists rivals with far greater resources and data that may be able to offer competing functionality at lower cost or free, customers that may develop competing products, competitors that may build their own solutions on open-source software, and possible OEM pricing pressure. The 10-K reports substantial net losses and negative operating cash flows to date, and GAAP gross margin fell from 75.4% (FY2023) to 42.4% (FY2025), a decline the company attributes mainly to acquisition mix and amortization. The advantage looks narrow and not yet proven economically.

Applied Digital designs, builds and operates purpose-built, liquid-cooled HPC data centers, which it calls 'AI factories', and leases the capacity to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers. At May 31, 2026 its 10-K lists five campuses (Polaris Forge 1-3 and Delta Forge 1-2) with about 1,410 MW contracted under roughly 15-year take-or-pay, non-cancellable leases worth about $36.2 billion over the base terms. The filing claims three sources of advantage: it controls power-advantaged sites, it uses a standardized 'franchise-style' design built to deliver about 150 MW in about 14 to 18 months, and it holds hyperscaler master agreements that are 'difficult to obtain.' The same document shows how early the company is. About 100 MW was operating and earning revenue. One customer was 59% of FY2026 revenue from continuing operations. It competes with Digital Realty, Equinix, hyperscalers that build their own capacity and 13 named power-advantaged developers, and it concedes that it lacks the resources to compete with larger providers. Signed leases give long-dated revenue visibility, but the filing does not show a durable competitive advantage.

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".

Voice and agentic AI layer that OEMs, restaurants and enterprises embed under their own brand. Per the 10-K it combines its domains with third-party LLMs such as OpenAI's ChatGPT and runs on hosting facilities and third-party public clouds.

Developer and landlord of power-advantaged, liquid-cooled AI data-center capacity, leased long-term to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Houndify Voice AI platform (automotive, TV, IoT) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • OASYS enterprise agentic AI platform Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • Smart Ordering and Smart Answering (restaurant voice AI) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • SoundHound Chat AI (generative voice assistant) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • Blockchain data center hosting (Jamestown / Ellendale) Niche · Low source: sec.gov
  • HPC data center leasing (Polaris Forge / Delta Forge AI factories) Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.15 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →