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 Palantir Technologies×JPMorgan Chase×Cisco Systems× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
Palantir Technologies PLTR ai moat: latest change 2026-02-17 JPMorgan Chase JPM ai moat: latest change 2026-02-13 Cisco Systems CSCO ai moat: latest change 2025-09-03
Moat rating narrow

The FY2025 10-K competition section concedes that some competitors have 'greater name recognition, longer operating histories, and larger customer bases', 'larger and more mature intellectual property portfolios', and 'substantially greater financial, technical, and other resources' — and that Palantir is 'fundamentally competing with the internal software development efforts of our potential customers'. A real moat exists but the filing's own disclosure caps it below wide.

source: sec.gov

wide

The 2025 Form 10-K opens with a balance sheet and a licensing perimeter that a new entrant cannot assemble: $4.4 trillion in assets and $362.4 billion in stockholders' equity at December 31, 2025, a principal bank subsidiary (JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.) with branches in 48 states and Washington, D.C., 318,512 employees across 66 countries, and consolidated supervision as a bank and financial holding company by the Federal Reserve, layered with the OCC, FDIC, SEC, FINRA, CFTC, U.K. PRA/FCA and the ECB over its principal subsidiaries. Item 1 also notes the Bank Holding Company Act restricts holding companies to banking and closely-related activities, so the charter itself is scarce. Rated wide rather than higher because Item 1's own Competition paragraph calls the environments 'highly competitive' and names e-commerce, digital-asset and financial-technology entrants that 'disintermediate traditional banking products'.

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2025 10-K shows a moat that still pays but no longer compounds: total gross margin of 64.9% and remaining performance obligations of $43,533 million (up 6%) against a Networking product category that fell from $34,570 million in fiscal 2023 to $29,229 million in fiscal 2024 to $28,304 million in fiscal 2025, and a product gross-margin bridge in which 'Product pricing' subtracted 1.6 percentage points. All of the reported category growth came from Splunk-carrying lines - Security +59% and Observability +26%. Real and durable, but bounded: narrow, not wide.

source: sec.gov

Moat type switching costs

The 10-K reports that 'our top three customers by revenue for the year ended December 31, 2025, have been with us for an average of ten years' and that a significant portion of revenue comes from existing customers expanding their relationships. The filing explicitly disclaims patent dependence — 'we are not dependent on any particular patent or application' — so the durable source is embedded deployment, not IP.

source: sec.gov

cost scale

The filing's durable advantage is scale rather than a proprietary technology or a stated network effect: $4.4 trillion of assets and $362.4 billion of equity, 318,512 employees, a 48-state branch footprint and a GSIB capital and liquidity regime administered under the Basel III framework. Item 1A repeatedly frames technology as a required expenditure - 'New technologies have required and could require JPMorganChase to increase expenditures to modify its products' and possible 'significant investments in technology' for quantum-resistant encryption - which is a fixed cost the firm spreads over a base few competitors match. The filing asserts no network effect and no switching-cost lock-in.

source: sec.gov

switching costs

The durable piece is the contracted annuity attached to installed equipment: total remaining performance obligations of $43,533 million, of which $21,961 million is services and $21,810 million is long-term (recognised beyond twelve months), carried at a services gross margin of 68.5% that has risen for three consecutive years from 66.4% and 68.1%. Customers keep paying for support on gear they already run.

source: sec.gov

Leadership at parity

The 10-K claims only that 'we believe we generally compete favorably with our competitors', while conceding rivals' greater scale, recognition and resources. The filing does not assert market leadership, so a leader band is not groundable from it.

source: sec.gov

co leader

Item 1 claims the firm is 'a leader' in five distinct businesses at once, and 'a leading financial services firm based in the United States' - but it claims to be 'a leader', never the leader, and names no rank or peer comparison anywhere in Item 1 or Item 1A. Scale disclosed in the filing (assets, equity, 318,512 employees, 66 countries, CCB 144,196 / CIB 94,563 / AWM 29,722 headcount) puts it in the front rank; the document itself supports a co-leader reading and not a sole-leader one.

source: sec.gov

co leader

The 10-K names no competitor and discloses no market share anywhere in Management's Discussion and Analysis. The positional facts it does give are scale and direction: Networking product revenue of $28,304 million in fiscal 2025 - by far the largest of its four categories - but down $6.3 billion from fiscal 2023, with channel partner financing volume falling from $32.1 billion to $27.1 billion to $24.9 billion across fiscal 2023-2025.

source: sec.gov

Pricing power strong

FY2025 gross profit of $3.7 billion on a gross margin of 82% (84% excluding stock-based compensation), up from 80% (83% ex-SBC) in FY2024 — a sustained and rising 80%+ gross margin.

source: sec.gov

moderate

Item 1 states the businesses 'generally compete on the basis of the quality and variety of the Firm's products and services, transaction execution, innovation, reputation and price' - price is one of several axes, not absent. Item 1A is explicit that 'Actions by competitors could put pressure on the pricing for JPMorganChase's products and services or could cause it to lose market share, particularly with respect to investment products and traditional banking products,' and separately that higher rates can cause 'the loss of deposits, including where customers transition to higher-yielding products.' The filing states no margin trend supporting stronger pricing power.

source: sec.gov

moderate

The product gross-margin bridge attributes fiscal 2025's 0.2-point improvement to productivity (+2.0 points) and mix (+1.1 points) while 'Product pricing' subtracted 1.6 points; a legal dispute with a supplier cost a further 0.8 points. Total gross margin of 64.9% (product 63.7%, services 68.5%) is held by cost and mix, not by price.

source: sec.gov

Summary

Customers who deploy Foundry model their operations in the Ontology and build workflows on top of it, so displacement means rebuilding that layer rather than swapping a vendor — which is why the 10-K frames its main competitor as the customer's own internal build effort. Ten-year average tenure among the top three customers is the filing's own evidence that those deployments persist.

Item 1 describes JPMorganChase as 'a leader in investment banking, financial services for consumers and small businesses, commercial banking, financial transaction processing and asset management' operating off a $4.4 trillion balance sheet with $362.4 billion of equity as of December 31, 2025. The protection is the combination of that scale with a regulatory perimeter - Federal Reserve consolidated supervision, a national bank charter under the OCC, and separately licensed broker-dealer and credit-institution subsidiaries in the U.K. and Germany - that bounds who may offer the same product set. The filing is candid that the perimeter is leaking at the edges: it names non-depository and internet-only entrants offering lending, payments processing, cryptocurrency and stablecoins, tokenized securities and algorithmic investment advice, and warns of 'disruption to payments processing... from the use of new technologies that may not require intermediation'.

The installed base still switches slowly - but the filing does not claim it is winning the AI datacenter on the strength of that base. The fiscal 2025 Networking decline is attributed to 'product shipments returning to normalized levels during the first half of fiscal 2025 from the elevated levels ... in the first half of fiscal 2024', to servers, and to 'a decline in campus switching' - normalisation, not disclosed share loss, so the whitebox/Arista thesis is not something this 10-K either confirms or denies. What the filing does disclose is the shape of the AI dollar Cisco is actually winning: Americas service provider and cloud growth 'driven by AI infrastructure revenue from webscale customers', funded by additional purchase commitments 'related to manufacturing Cisco Silicon One and other products to meet demand from webscale and other customers', which 'significantly increased our supply chain exposure, which has resulted in negative impacts to our product gross margin in recent periods and may result in further negative impacts in future periods'. Enterprise switching earns 63.7% product gross margin; webscale silicon costs margin to serve. The moat is intact where the annuity is and thin where the growth is.

Chain position

Application-layer software sitting above the cloud and model providers; AIP connects to third-party LLMs rather than supplying them.

An AI adopter and a possible AI casualty, not an AI supplier: the filing books no AI revenue line and mentions no data-center or model exposure, and instead carries a dedicated risk factor on 'the development of advanced technologies such as AI' warning of 'competitive disadvantage if competitors are able to deploy AI more quickly or effectively' and of 'replacement or disintermediation of direct customer relationships if AI agents autonomously manage or intermediate financial decisions' - so its AI exposure as filed is defensive and operational rather than a supply-chain position.

Supplies networking into AI datacenters: the 10-K ties Americas service provider and cloud growth to 'AI infrastructure revenue from webscale customers' and to Cisco Silicon One manufacturing commitments.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Cisco Silicon One and webscale AI infrastructure Challenger · Low source: sec.gov
  • Collaboration (Webex Suite, devices, Contact Center, CPaaS) Challenger · Low source: sec.gov
  • Networking (switching, routing, wireless, servers) Leader · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Observability (Splunk Observability Suite, ThousandEyes) Niche · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Security (Splunk TDR, SASE, network security) Top 3 · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • Technical support and services Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.11 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

+0.30 at weight 0.20 · swarm bullish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

+0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →