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

The FY2025 10-K prints a network comparison for calendar year 2024: Visa at $13,433B payments volume, 311B total transactions and 4,805M cards, against Mastercard's $8,014B / 204B / 3,146M and American Express's $1,750B / 12B / 147M. Footnote (1) sources the American Express, Diners Club / Discover, JCB and Mastercard data to The Nilson Report issue 1288 (June 2025); Visa's own line is Visa's own data. On that table Visa's payments volume is roughly two-thirds larger than the next network's, and the same section states 'Based on available data, Visa is one of the largest retail electronic funds transfer networks used throughout the world.' The rating is wide because the lead rests on a two-sided installed base the filing quantifies — nearly 5 billion payment credentials and more than 175 million merchant locations across more than 200 countries and territories — which an entrant would have to reassemble on both sides at once. The table is a single-year snapshot with no prior-year column, so it evidences the size of the lead, not its direction.

source: sec.gov

The FY2025 10-K asserts a durable competitive position across essentially all of the revenue base: for Electrical Americas and Electrical Global it states 'Eaton has a strong competitive position in these segments and, with respect to many products, is considered among the market leaders'; it repeats that language verbatim for Aerospace ('industry-leading portfolio', 'considered among the market leaders'); and for Vehicle it states 'Eaton is considered among the market leaders in this segment.' That is a claimed leadership position in four of the five reported segments, on a base of $27.4 billion of 2025 revenue, ~97,000 employees and customers in 180 countries, from a company founded in 1911. The rating is tempered rather than lifted higher by the filing's own admissions - price is named among the principal methods of competition in the Electrical, Vehicle and eMobility segments, and the risk factors flag 'newly competitive market players' and that 'our positions may also be impacted by new entrants into our product or regional markets.'

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

Visa itself names the two sides as the source of advantage: 'We believe our fundamental value proposition of security, convenience, speed and reliability as well as the number of payment credentials and our acceptance footprint help us to succeed.' In fiscal 2025 the 10-K counts nearly 5 billion payment credentials, which it defines as issued Visa card accounts, available at more than 175 million merchant locations, with nearly 14,500 financial institutions among the clients that build payment programs on Visa products. The two bases are joined through VisaNet in what the filing calls the 'four-party' model. Neither side is worth joining without the other, so the advantage is the mutual pull of the two installed bases rather than a patent estate or a cost curve.

source: sec.gov

The filing's own description of how it competes points at designed-in and qualified positions rather than IP or pure scale. In Aerospace the principal methods of competition are listed as 'total cost of ownership, product and system performance, quality, design engineering capabilities, and timely delivery' - price is conspicuously absent, and 20% of segment sales go to three large aircraft OEMs, i.e. platform-level content that is qualified in and hard to displace mid-programme. In the Electrical segments 'customer service and support' sits alongside performance and technology as a method of competition, and 22% of sales go to six large customers. Intangibles_ip is explicitly ruled out as the primary source by the company itself: 'management believes that the loss or expiration of any single intellectual property right would not in and of itself have a material effect on Eaton's consolidated financial statements or its business segments.' Scale is real but secondary - the filing notes raw materials are bought 'from many suppliers' and 'under normal circumstances, the Company has no difficulty obtaining its raw materials,' which reads as supply resilience rather than a cost advantage claim.

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

On the 10-K's CY2024 comparison table, Visa carried 311 billion total transactions and $13,433B of payments volume against 204 billion and $8,014B for Mastercard, the largest competitor listed. American Express is next at $1,750B and 147M cards — under a seventh of Visa's payments volume and under a thirtieth of its cards — with Diners Club / Discover ($253B, 72M cards) and JCB ($319B, 167M cards) smaller still on volume. Visa's line is its own data; the competitor lines are sourced to The Nilson Report issue 1288 (June 2025) per footnote (1).

source: sec.gov

The filing's leadership language is plural and hedged, not exclusive: 'considered among the market leaders' for the Electrical segments (qualified further by 'with respect to many products'), 'among the market leaders' for Aerospace, and 'Eaton is considered among the market leaders' for Vehicle. Nowhere does the 10-K claim to be the single leader in any market, and it never names a competitor or cites a market-share figure. 'Among the market leaders' maps to co_leader, not clear_leader.

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

Visa's own take is insulated from the fees regulators target: it sets default interchange rates but does not collect them — the 10-K says 'Generally, IRFs are paid by acquirers to issuers' and that 'the fees we receive from issuers and acquirers are not derived from IRFs or MDRs.' The reported margin is high but moved down in fiscal 2025: operating income of $23,994M on $40,000M of net revenue is a 60.0% operating margin, against 65.7% ($23,595M on $35,926M) in fiscal 2024. The cause is printed two lines above operating income in the same statement — the litigation provision rose from $462M to $2,562M — and the filing says litigation provisions 'do not correlate to the underlying performance of our business' and that it excludes them 'to facilitate a comparison to our past operating performance.' Adding that provision back to operating income in both years leaves 66.4% against 67.0%, so the pricing base held and the decline is a legal charge, not a fee concession. The real limits are indirect: Dodd-Frank and the EU IFR cap interchange Visa never earns, client incentives are paid back to clients and rise with payments volume, and the UK Payment Systems Regulator holds 'wide-ranging powers and authority to review our business practices, systems, rules and fees with respect to promoting competition and innovation in the UK, and ensuring payment systems take care of, and promote, the interests of service users.'

source: sec.gov

The filing describes pass-through ability that is real but bounded. On input costs: 'While we strive to recoup these increased costs through our pricing, product modifications or other mediating responses, if we are unable to do so without compromising the competitive position of our products and services, our results could continue to be impacted by this trend.' On macro conditions: 'our responses to mitigate the impact of these conditions, such as potential price increases, could negatively impact our market share or relationships with distributors or customers.' On tariffs: 'potential price increases or other mitigating efforts could negatively impact market share or otherwise increase the risk of customer disputes.' Price is also listed as a principal method of competition in Electrical Americas, Electrical Global, Vehicle and eMobility - so raising price is described by the company as costing share. Aerospace is the exception, where price is not among the listed methods of competition. The filing states no gross-margin trend in Item 1 or Item 1A.

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".

Both a buyer and a seller of AI inside payments, not an AI infrastructure supplier: the 10-K claims 'early adoption and integration of artificial intelligence (AI) models in payment systems', sells 'risk detection and prevention solutions underpinned by real-time AI-driven scores' to issuers and acquirers, and opens its rails to third-party AI systems 'via on-demand APIs, our MCP server that enables AI systems to interface with our Visa Intelligent Commerce APIs, and fully managed solutions.'

Upstream electrical infrastructure into AI compute: Eaton supplies the power path from grid to rack, and the 10-K makes that link itself - data center is the first market it names, it cites 'momentum in the data center and utility end markets,' and its 2025-26 acquisitions target hyperscale/colocation modular buildings, solid-state transformers and liquid cooling 'from the chip to the grid.' Its exposure to AI is as a supplier to AI buildout, not as an AI technology vendor; the filing's only AI discussion of its own products is a risk factor about keeping pace with AI internally and about generative-AI compliance risk, which is incidental to the thesis.

• 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

• Risk and Security Solutions (Visa Protect, Featurespace) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Stablecoin settlement and Visa Tokenized Asset Platform Niche · Low source: sec.gov
• Tink open banking and Visa A2A Challenger · Low source: sec.gov
• Visa Direct Leader · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Visa consumer payments network (credit, debit, prepaid) Leader · Deep source: sec.gov

• Aerospace Top 3 · Deep source: sec.gov
• Electrical Americas Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Electrical Global Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Vehicle Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
• eMobility Unknown · Low 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 →