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.
| NetApp | TSMC | Lam Research | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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. | wide TSMC's 2025 Form 20-F reports a 59.9% gross margin (up from 56.1% in 2024) and describes the company as "the technology leader among the dedicated foundries" in advanced (7-nanometer-and-below) node revenue — a durable, hard-to-replicate process-and-scale advantage that rivals with "greater financial and other resources" have not matched. | wide The FY2026 10-K competition section describes tool-level qualification lock-in as the structural fact of the industry: 'semiconductor manufacturers must make a substantial investment to qualify and integrate new capital equipment into semiconductor production lines. As a result, once a semiconductor manufacturer has selected a particular supplier's equipment and qualified it for production, the manufacturer generally maintains that selection for that specific production application and technology node as long as the supplier's products demonstrate performance to specification in the installed base.' The filing then sizes what that incumbency is worth: of 23,232,690 thousand dollars of FY2026 revenue, 8,347,202 thousand - about 36% - was customer-support-related revenue and other, which the same document defines as 'sales of customer services, spares, upgrades, and non-leading-edge equipment' sold back into the installed base. A qualified position plus a third of revenue annuitised against it is a durable barrier rather than a cyclical one. |
| 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. | intangibles ip Per its 2025 Form 20-F, TSMC "compete[s] primarily on process technologies, manufacturing excellence, customer trust and service quality" and has "been issued a substantial number of patents," with 2-nanometer in volume production in 2025 and 16-angstrom risk production targeted for 2026 — proprietary process-technology know-how and IP, not merely capital (the filing explicitly notes some competitors may have greater financial resources yet still trail), are the core barrier. | switching costs The 10-K grounds the advantage in the cost of requalification, not in scale or patents: a customer that has qualified a competitor's tool is hard to win, and conversely Lam's own qualified positions persist for that application and node. The same section adds that the company must keep serving 'our installed base of customers through the delivery of high-quality and cost-efficient spare parts', naming the installed base as the asset being defended. |
| 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". | clear leader Self-described in its 2025 20-F as "the technology leader among the dedicated foundries" in net revenue of advanced semiconductors at 7-nanometer and below; reached 2nm volume production in 2025, and Epoch AI estimates ~90% share of global advanced-node fabrication. | co leader The 10-K claims position but not primacy: 'We believe we are in a strong position with our leadership and expertise in deposition, etch, and clean markets.' The same document names Applied Materials as primary competitor in deposition and Applied Materials, Hitachi and Tokyo Electron as primary competitors in etch, which is a shared-leadership structure rather than a clear single leader. |
| 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. | strong 2025 gross margin of 59.9% (up from 56.1% in 2024), attributed in the 20-F to higher capacity utilization and cost improvement, reflects strong pricing power at the leading edge despite the heavy capital intensity of new-node ramps. | moderate Real but bounded, and the filing is explicit that the recent gain was mix rather than price. Gross margin as a percent of total revenue rose 180 basis points to 50.5% in fiscal 2026 from 48.7% in fiscal 2025 (gross margin of 11,725,308 thousand dollars on revenue of 23,232,690 thousand, against 8,979,059 on 18,435,591; 7,052,791 on 14,905,386 in fiscal 2024), and the MD&A attributes that: 'Gross margin as a percentage of revenue increased in fiscal year 2026 compared to fiscal year 2025 largely due to favorable customer mix, partially offset by aluminum and steel tariff-related spend.' Against it, the same filing says manufacturers evaluate suppliers on 'overall cost of ownership', that the spares business competes with third-party spare parts providers, and that the customer list is a handful of very large buyers (Micron, Samsung, SK hynix and TSMC named as the most significant customers). |
| 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. | TSMC is the world's largest dedicated semiconductor foundry and, per its 2025 Form 20-F, the self-described technology leader among dedicated foundries in advanced (7nm-and-below) node revenue, having reached 2-nanometer volume production in 2025 with 16-angstrom risk production on track for 2026. Independent research (Epoch AI) estimates it controls roughly 90% of global advanced-node fabrication; sustained by US$7.9 billion of 2025 R&D, a large patent portfolio and 59.9% gross margins, this process-technology and scale advantage has proven durable even against rivals with greater financial resources. | Lam sells etch, deposition and clean tools into a per-node, per-application qualification process that its own 10-K says customers generally do not revisit once a supplier is qualified. The result is two linked economics, and the FY2026 filing splits them: systems revenue of 14,885,488 thousand dollars and customer-support-related revenue and other of 8,347,202 thousand, on total revenue of 23,232,690 thousand. The second line is the installed-base annuity - services, spares, upgrades and refurbished Reliant tools sold wherever Lam already holds the process step. The 10-K names Applied Materials as the primary competitor in dielectric and metals deposition, ASM International and Wonik IPS in ALD/PECVD, and Applied Materials, Hitachi and Tokyo Electron in etch, so this is shared rather than sole leadership. The live erosion risk is policy, not a rival product: China was 34% of revenue in both fiscal 2026 and fiscal 2025 (7,859,811 thousand dollars in FY2026, the largest single region), and the filing states that U.S. export controls on sales to customers in China, including entity listings of multiple customers, restrict sales of equipment and spare parts by U.S. suppliers and thereby 'provides an advantage to our international competitors that are not subject to these restrictions'. |
| 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". | The critical leading-edge fabrication and advanced-packaging (CoWoS) layer of the AI supply chain — high-performance computing was 58% of TSMC's 2025 revenue, and it supplies leading-edge N2/N3/N4 logic to the fabless IC-design and system companies that design AI accelerators. | Upstream wafer-fabrication-equipment supplier; the 10-K names Micron, Samsung, SK hynix and TSMC as its most significant customers across FY2024-FY2026, so Lam sits one step above the memory and foundry capacity that AI compute depends on. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.42 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.30 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |