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.
| Oracle | NetApp | C3.ai | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | wide Oracle's FY2026 10-K (fiscal year ended May 31, 2026) describes an installed base in which "substantially all customers opt to purchase software support contracts when they purchase an Oracle software license"; that entrenchment shows up externally as the #1 DB-Engines database ranking (August 2026, first of 435 systems) and $638B of contracted Remaining Performance Obligations at Q4 FY2026 (press release, June 10, 2026) — a durable, multi-decade lock on mission-critical enterprise data layers. | 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. | eroding The FY2026 10-K's own financial statements show revenue down ~36% year over year to $250.3M with GAAP gross profit collapsing from $235.9M to $77.4M, while its Competition section concedes the primary competition is do-it-yourself platforms assembled from hyperscaler and open-source components and that strategic partners may offer substantially similar solutions — differentiation that is visibly failing to defend share or price in a growing enterprise-AI market. |
| Moat type | switching costs The core moat is the cost of moving mission-critical databases and back-office suites: the FY2026 10-K notes substantially all license customers attach support contracts and that Oracle's Multicloud Database offerings run Oracle AI Database inside other hyperscalers' clouds — monetizing the installed base even when the customer's infrastructure leaves; the KLAS 2026 EHR report shows the same dynamic in health IT, where roughly a third of Oracle Health customers want to leave but feel unable to do so. | 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 The 10-K's 'Strategic Competitive IP Advantage' section grounds the remaining moat in patents — 33 issued U.S. patents including a foundational agentic-AI orchestration patent (US 12,111,859) — and the patented model-driven architecture the filing presents as its sustainable competitive advantage. |
| Leadership | co leader Split by line: clear leader in database (DB-Engines August 2026 ranks Oracle #1 and Oracle-owned MySQL #2 of 435 systems); one of the largest enterprise-application vendors ($15.9B FY2026 SaaS revenue, competing with SAP, Salesforce, Workday and Microsoft per the FY2026 10-K); but in cloud infrastructure a ~4%-share fast-growing challenger behind Amazon (28%), Microsoft (20%) and Google (15%) per Synergy Q2 2026 data (The Register, 2026-08-01), and #2 in US acute-care EHR behind Epic (KLAS 2026). | 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". | behind Despite tracker recognitions the filing cites (a Leader in the 2024 Forrester Wave for AI/ML Platforms; 2024-2025 Constellation ShortLists), FY2026 revenue contracted ~36% while the filing describes the AI software market as expanding past $450B — a franchise losing ground to the DIY and hyperscaler alternatives its own Competition section names. |
| Pricing power | moderate Strong in the installed base — the FY2026 10-K states substantially all license customers purchase support contracts, a recurring stream customers rarely drop — but the same 10-K lists "total cost of ownership" first among key competitive factors and describes intense competition across every segment; AI-infrastructure deals are won against hyperscalers and neoclouds, and Q4 FY2026 SaaS grew a moderate 10% versus 93% for IaaS (press release, June 10, 2026). | 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. | weak GAAP gross margin fell from ~61% in FY2025 to ~31% in FY2026 per the 10-K income statement, and the filing describes its consumption-based pricing model as adopted to make products 'easier and less costly' to adopt — the opposite of pricing leverage. |
| Summary | Oracle pairs the deepest switching-cost franchise in enterprise software — the #1-ranked database (DB-Engines, August 2026) plus Fusion/NetSuite back-office suites, with support attach near-universal per the FY2026 10-K — with a late but explosive push into AI cloud infrastructure: Q4 FY2026 IaaS revenue grew 93% to $5.8B and RPO reached $638B (up 363% YoY), mostly large-scale AI contracts (press release, June 10, 2026). The two reinforce each other via multicloud — Oracle Multicloud AI Database grew 404% in Q4 running inside rival clouds. The offsets: in cloud infrastructure Oracle is still a ~4%-share challenger behind AWS/Microsoft/Google (Synergy Q2 2026 data via The Register), the AI buildout drove FY2026 free cash flow to negative $23.7B, and the Cerner-based Oracle Health business has lost US hospital share for three straight years (KLAS 2026). | 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. | C3.ai's residual moat is intellectual property: a patented model-driven architecture the FY2026 10-K credits with ~26x faster application development, a 33-patent U.S. portfolio including the first foundational agentic-AI orchestration patent, and prebuilt applications encoding 15 years of industry domain knowledge. The same filing concedes its primary competition is do-it-yourself platforms built from hyperscaler and open-source components, and FY2026 results — revenue down ~36% to $250M with GAAP gross margin roughly halved to ~31% — show that IP has not defended pricing or share. |
| Chain position | Supply-chain role in AI: OCI sells GPU compute for AI training and inference — the Q4 FY2026 press release attributes most of the $85B sequential RPO increase to large-scale AI contracts (some with customer-prepaid or customer-supplied GPUs totaling $75B) and guides FY2027 total revenue to $90B — making Oracle a primary capacity supplier to AI model builders. | 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". | Application-layer pure play: sells prebuilt enterprise-AI applications and an agentic platform to industrial and government end users, downstream of the hyperscaler clouds and LLM providers it deploys on. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.30 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | -0.38 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish Editorial prior, not backtested. |