Compare moats

The FY2025 10-K (fiscal year ended August 29, 2025) documents design-in niches but no durable excess return. In favour: the Competition section says some large rivals 'tend to have limited customization and service capabilities and are generally focused on higher-volume memory, storage, or compute products that are manufactured to industry-standard specifications'. It says the company's 'close collaboration with customers, customer-specific designs, long-lifecycle solutions, superior products and proprietary supply chain services create significant customer loyalty that may provide an advantage when competing against large international companies'. Against: the same filing says many competitors have 'substantially greater financial, technical, marketing, distribution and other resources' and 'lower cost structures'. Sales are made 'primarily pursuant to customer purchase orders and are not based on long-term supply agreements', and 'customers are not obligated to purchase our products even if we achieve a design win'. Large customers 'have exerted' pressure for price concessions, and the ten largest were 66% of fiscal 2025 net sales. GAAP operating income was 0.6%, 1.6% and 4.2% of net sales in fiscal 2023, 2024 and 2025, and fiscal 2024 had a net loss from continuing operations of $41.8 million. The 10-Q for the quarter ended May 29, 2026 (filed 2026-07-07, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1616533/000161653326000043/peng-20260529.htm) adds that Advanced Computing nine-month sales fell 20.6%, reflecting 'both the ongoing Penguin Edge wind down and hyperscale hardware sales in 2025 that did not recur in 2026'. The filing's own advantage claim is hedged ('may provide an advantage'): design-in niches exist, but the 10-K shows no durable excess return.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

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

The strongest candidate moat source in the 10-K is design-in and qualification, a switching-cost argument, and the filing limits it too far to count. The risk factors say 'Our products are often incorporated into customers' systems at the design stage', and many specialty products 'are specifically designed for our OEM customers' systems or products'. But qualification is 'both product-specific and platform-specific', so a design win covers one platform. The filing notes that customers 'sometimes require us to re-qualify our products' for new platforms, which 'can be time-consuming and cause reductions in our net sales', so each new platform reopens the socket. It also says 'customers are not obligated to purchase our products even if we achieve a design win', and warns that OEMs designing in 'standardized or commodity components' could reduce demand for its 'higher priced specialized or customized solutions'. Scale is ruled out because the filing says many competitors have lower cost structures. Patents are ruled out as a durable source. The company holds about 1,650 of them and calls intellectual property 'an important aspect of our business', but it says its patents 'do not cover all of our technologies' and that competitors 'may design around our patented technologies'. It also says some products are 'built around mature industry standards and have less patent protection', so 'we cannot prevent our competitors from reverse-engineering and duplicating those products'.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

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

The 10-K claims no share figure or rank in any segment. It says 'Our businesses compete with numerous global and local companies'. Its HPC and AI business 'competes primarily with global manufacturers of HPC and AI products and services'. For fault-tolerant solutions it says 'we primarily compete with manufacturers of enterprise servers and industrial computers'. Its memory business competes 'against memory module providers and, to a lesser extent, large semiconductor manufacturers'. The risk factors warn that larger competitors 'may be able to respond better to new or emerging technologies, such as generative AI'. Against that, the company's stated edge is customization and service, where it says some large rivals 'tend to have limited customization and service capabilities'. Its leadership language is self-description without share figures: Cree LED 'has been a leader in LED lighting technology', Stratus Technologies is 'a global leader in simplified, protected and autonomous computing platforms and services', and the memory business is 'a primary supplier of longer-lifecycle solutions to OEM customers'. A specialist that claims no rank and faces many larger, lower-cost rivals, while neither leading nor clearly trailing in its niches, is parity.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

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

The FY2025 10-K describes price as set by customers and the market. It says its large customers 'are able to exert, have exerted and we expect will continue to exert, pressure on us to make concessions on price and on terms and conditions'. It says 'The markets for our Integrated Memory products have historically been characterized by declines in average selling prices', and that 'Competitive pressure has led in the past and may continue to lead to intensified price competition resulting in lower net sales and lower profit margins'. Gross margin held in a narrow band: 28.8% in fiscal 2023, 29.1% in fiscal 2024 and 28.8% in fiscal 2025. The filing attributes each move to mix, for example higher-margin Advanced Computing service revenue in 2024, not to pricing. The 10-Q for the quarter ended May 29, 2026 (filed 2026-07-07, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1616533/000161653326000043/peng-20260529.htm) reports gross margin of 27.8% versus 29.3% a year earlier (27.7% versus 28.9% for nine months), which it attributes to the Penguin Edge wind-down and sales mix. Third-quarter Integrated Memory sales rose 111.4% (75.6% for nine months) as 'accelerating AI-driven demand drove favorable pricing and increased volume', and the 10-Q says that business has 'gross margins which are lower than the Company average'.

source: sec.gov

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.

source: sec.gov

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

Downstream integrator. Per the 10-K it buys memory from Samsung, Micron, SK hynix and Kioxia and processors from Intel and AMD, and turns them into specialty memory modules and managed AI/HPC clusters for OEM, enterprise, government and cloud customers.

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.

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

• AI and HPC infrastructure (OriginAI, ICE ClusterWare) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
• Cree LED chips and components (XLamp, J Series, high-brightness SMD) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
• SMART Modular specialty memory and storage (DRAM modules, Zefr, CXL, flash/SSD) Niche · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Stratus fault-tolerant computing (ztC Endurance, ftServer, ztC Edge, everRun) Niche · Low source: sec.gov

• Advanced packaging (CoWoS) Leader · Deep source: epoch.ai
• Leading-edge foundry (advanced-node logic, 7nm and below incl. N3/N2) Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• Mainstream & specialty foundry technologies Top 3 · Moderate 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

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 →