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.
| Seagate Technology | Applied Digital | CoreWeave | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moat rating | narrow The FY2026 10-K names Western Digital and Toshiba as the HDD competitors plus 'NAND flash suppliers that provide and enable alternative storage technologies' — a two-and-a-half-player market with a substitute technology pressing on it, defended by scale rather than lock-in. | none 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. | narrow The FY2025 10-K describes a purpose-built AI cloud with a real performance edge, but its own risk section discloses the defining constraint: 'approximately 67% of our revenue from our top customer, Microsoft, for the year ended December 31, 2025' — a specialized platform whose economics rest on one buyer that is also a hyperscaler competitor is narrow, not wide. |
| Moat type | cost scale The filing grounds its position in 'our areal density-driven technology roadmap' and 'vertically integrated engineering and manufacturing capabilities' — cost per terabyte at scale is the moat. | none 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. | cost scale The 10-K grounds the advantage in purpose-built infrastructure — first-to-deploy NVIDIA GB200/GB300 NVL72 systems and a data-center fabric 'designed to harness the full potential of each GPU' — a performance-per-dollar edge at scale, not a customer lock. |
| Leadership | co leader The competition section names exactly two HDD rivals — Western Digital and Toshiba — making this one of three global suppliers of the technology. | behind 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). | co leader The 10-K positions CoreWeave as a first-to-deploy specialist against hyperscalers who offer AI compute 'as part of a broader product portfolio' — a leader of the purpose-built neocloud niche, not of the AI-cloud market its own filing says it competes in. |
| Pricing power | weak The filing's own list of competitive factors leads with capacity, performance and 'total cost of ownership' — buyers evaluate on delivered cost, and hyperscale customers purchase under master agreements with demand forecasts, which is buyer leverage. | weak 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. | moderate A first-to-deploy performance edge on scarce new NVIDIA systems supports pricing while the hardware is scarce, but 67% single-customer concentration is buyer leverage the filing states outright. |
| Summary | Seagate sells mass-capacity storage economics: HDDs to 44TB and systems to 3.5PB for hyperscalers, CSPs and OEMs, with the filing calling HDDs 'a foundational technology for delivering scalable, energy-efficient, mass-capacity storage with favorable storage economics.' The counterweight the same section names is NAND: flash suppliers 'enable alternative storage technologies,' so the moat is a cost race, not a fortress. | Applied Digital designs, builds and operates purpose-built, liquid-cooled HPC data centers, which it calls 'AI factories', and leases the capacity to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers. At May 31, 2026 its 10-K lists five campuses (Polaris Forge 1-3 and Delta Forge 1-2) with about 1,410 MW contracted under roughly 15-year take-or-pay, non-cancellable leases worth about $36.2 billion over the base terms. The filing claims three sources of advantage: it controls power-advantaged sites, it uses a standardized 'franchise-style' design built to deliver about 150 MW in about 14 to 18 months, and it holds hyperscaler master agreements that are 'difficult to obtain.' The same document shows how early the company is. About 100 MW was operating and earning revenue. One customer was 59% of FY2026 revenue from continuing operations. It competes with Digital Realty, Equinix, hyperscalers that build their own capacity and 13 named power-advantaged developers, and it concedes that it lacks the resources to compete with larger providers. Signed leases give long-dated revenue visibility, but the filing does not show a durable competitive advantage. | CoreWeave sells a full-lifecycle AI cloud — training, inference, data movement, agentic workflows — on infrastructure 'purpose-built to accelerate breakthroughs by AI pioneers,' with the Weights & Biases acquisition adding the developer tooling layer as 'a single stack.' The edge the filing claims is speed and efficiency on the newest NVIDIA systems. The moat's ceiling is in the same document's risk factors: 67% of 2025 revenue came from Microsoft, and the hyperscalers it competes with are 'also customers of, and partners to, CoreWeave' — the largest buyer and the largest rival are the same companies. |
| Chain position | Layer-3 mass-capacity storage under every AI data lake. | Developer and landlord of power-advantaged, liquid-cooled AI data-center capacity, leased long-term to CoreWeave and investment-grade hyperscalers. | Layer-8 purpose-built AI neocloud — first-to-deploy NVIDIA systems for training and inference at scale. |
| Products (share / barrier) |
|
|
|
| Long-horizon vote | +0.05 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | -0.20 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. | +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral Editorial prior, not backtested. |