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 Snowflake×Cipher Mining× add + AMD AMD+ ASE Technology Holding ASX+ ASM International ASMIY+ ASML ASML+ ASMPT ASMVY+ ASUSTeK Computer ASUUY+ Adobe ADBE+ Advantest ATEYY+ Alibaba Group BABA+ Alphabet GOOGL+ Amazon AMZN+ Ambarella AMBA+ Amkor Technology AMKR+ Amphenol APH+ AppLovin APP+ Apple AAPL+ Applied Digital APLD+ Applied Materials AMAT+ Applied Optoelectronics AAOI+ Arista Networks ANET+ Arm Holdings ARM+ Astera Labs ALAB+ Axcelis Technologies ACLS+ Baidu BIDU+ Bloom Energy BE+ Broadcom AVGO+ C3.ai AI+ CXMT 688825.SS+ Cadence Design Systems CDNS+ Camtek CAMT+ Celestica CLS+ Cerebras Systems CBRS+ ChipMOS Technologies IMOS+ Ciena CIEN+ Cisco Systems CSCO+ Cloudflare NET+ Coca-Cola KO+ Coherent Corp COHR+ Comfort Systems USA FIX+ Constellation Energy CEG+ Core Scientific CORZ+ CoreWeave CRWV+ Corning GLW+ Credo Technology CRDO+ CrowdStrike CRWD+ Datadog DDOG+ Deere & Company DE+ Dell Technologies DELL+ Digital Realty Trust DLR+ DigitalOcean DOCN+ Disco Corporation DSCSY+ Duolingo DUOL+ EMCOR Group EME+ Eaton ETN+ Eli Lilly and Company LLY+ Equinix EQIX+ Everpure, Inc. P+ Everspin Technologies MRAM+ Extreme Networks EXTR+ Fabrinet FN+ Flex FLEX+ FormFactor FORM+ GE Vernova GEV+ Gigabyte Technology 2376.TW+ GitLab GTLB+ GlobalFoundries GFS+ Hewlett Packard Enterprise HPE+ Hon Hai Precision (Foxconn) HNHPF+ Hua Hong Semiconductor 1347.HK+ Hut 8 HUT+ IBM IBM+ IREN IREN+ Intel INTC+ Inventec 2356.TW+ Iron Mountain IRM+ JCET Group 600584.SS+ JPMorgan Chase JPM+ Jabil JBL+ Johnson Controls International JCI+ KLA Corporation KLAC+ Kioxia Holdings KXIAY+ Kulicke & Soffa KLIC+ Lam Research LRCX+ Lattice Semiconductor LSCC+ Lenovo Group LNVGY+ Lumentum Holdings LITE+ MACOM Technology Solutions MTSI+ Macronix International 2337.TW+ Marvell Technology MRVL+ MaxLinear MXL+ MediaTek 2454.TW+ Meta Platforms META+ MiTAC Holdings 3706.TW+ Micron MU+ Microsoft MSFT+ MiniMax 0100.HK+ Moderna MRNA+ Modine Manufacturing MOD+ MongoDB MDB+ Montage Technology 688008.SS+ NVIDIA NVDA+ Nanya Technology 2408.TW+ Nebius Group NBIS+ NetApp NTAP+ Netflix NFLX+ Netlist NLST+ Nokia NOK+ Nova Ltd NVMI+ Onto Innovation ONTO+ Oracle ORCL+ Palantir Technologies PLTR+ Palo Alto Networks PANW+ Pegatron 4938.TW+ Penguin Solutions PENG+ Pfizer PFE+ Phison Electronics 8299.TWO+ Powell Industries, Inc. POWL+ Powerchip Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation 6770.TW+ Powertech Technology 6239.TW+ Qualcomm QCOM+ Quanta Computer 2382.TW+ RELX plc RELX+ Rambus RMBS+ SAP SAP+ SK Hynix SKHY+ Salesforce CRM+ Samsung Electronics 005930.KS+ SanDisk SNDK+ Sanmina SANM+ Schneider Electric SBGSY+ Seagate Technology STX+ Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation 0981.HK+ Semtech SMTC+ ServiceNow NOW+ Silicon Motion Technology SIMO+ SoundHound AI SOUN+ Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) SPCX+ Super Micro Computer SMCI+ Synopsys SNPS+ TE Connectivity TEL+ TSMC TSM+ Talen Energy TLN+ Tempus AI TEM+ Tencent Holdings TCEHY+ TeraWulf WULF+ Teradyne TER+ Tesla, Inc. TSLA+ The Walt Disney Company DIS+ Tokyo Electron 8035.T+ Tongfu Microelectronics 002156.SZ+ Tower Semiconductor TSEM+ Trane Technologies TT+ United Microelectronics Corporation UMC+ Vanguard International Semiconductor 5347.TWO+ Vertiv VRT+ Visa V+ Vistra VST+ Walmart WMT+ Western Digital WDC+ Winbond Electronics 2344.TW+ Wistron 3231.TW+ Wiwynn 6669.TW+ X-FAB Silicon Foundries XFAB.PA+ X-energy XE+ Zhipu AI 2513.HK+ nVent Electric NVT
Snowflake SNOW ai moat: latest change 2026-03-20 Cipher Mining CIFR ai moat: latest change 2026-02-24
Moat rating narrow

Narrow, not wide, because the FY2026 10-K documents a strong installed base and a competitive position the company itself says is under erosion. On the asset side: revenue of $4.7 billion (29% growth in each of the last three fiscal years), 13,328 total customers up from 10,996, 790 of the Forbes Global 2000 contributing about 43% of revenue, 733 customers above $1 million in trailing-12-month product revenue up from 576, a 125% net revenue retention rate, and more than 1,050 issued U.S. patents. Against that, Item 1A states plainly that adopting open data formats like Apache Iceberg means 'there is less customer “lock in” when our products are used in external environments' and that 'our support of open data formats may also reduce switching costs between us and our competitors'; that AWS, Azure and GCP 'generally compete in all of our markets' while also supplying the infrastructure a 'substantial majority of our business is run on'; and that the company remains loss-making at $1.3 billion of net loss for the year.

source: sec.gov

none

Cipher (renamed Cipher Digital Inc. on 20 February 2026) holds signed, credit-supported leases but has not yet shown that they amount to a durable advantage. Its 2025 Form 10-K (filed 2026-02-24) says "Through the end of 2025, our revenue has been derived from mining bitcoin". Its Q2 2026 business update (2026-08-04, Exhibit 99.1, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819989/000181998926000038/q226_earningsxprxdraftxvf.htm) reported "Q2 2026 Revenue of $25 million", and its first HPC rent began only in August 2026 at Black Pearl. The 10-K's own risk factors describe a contested market. They say "There has been an increasing number of businesses constructing HPC data centers, which has resulted in increasing competition and pricing pressure that may cause us to reduce our pricing in order to remain competitive", that "our data centers are single-tenant properties", and that lessees "will have the right to terminate the lease if there are significant delays in the completion of construction". At Barber Lake, where the 10-K targeted Phase I delivery "by September 30, 2026", a September 2026 amendment, made "In connection with change orders and the continued evolution of tenant requirements", moved data-hall deliveries to the fourth quarter of 2026 through the first quarter of 2027. Under it, Cipher "will bear the first $359.3 million of costs in excess of the initial budgeted amount" (2026-09-25). There is real counter-evidence: a 15-year Amazon lease, a Google-backstopped Fluidstack lease whose contracted life a "leading AI lab" extended to 20 years, and a third lease with an investment-grade hyperscale tenant. Until that capacity is delivered and paying rent, though, a moat is not shown, so the band is none.

source: sec.gov

Moat type switching costs

The filing makes its own affirmative claim of network effects — 'Our business benefits from powerful network effects. ... The more customers adopt our platform, the more data can be exchanged with other Snowflake customers, partners, data providers, and data consumers' — but the load-bearing, quantified evidence in the document points to switching costs. The platform is sold as the way to 'consolidate data into a single source of truth,' and the disclosed economics of that consolidation are a 125% net revenue retention rate and 733 customers above $1 million in trailing product revenue. Item 1A confirms the mechanism by naming what is at risk: open formats produce 'less customer “lock in”' and 'may also reduce switching costs.' The filing frames lock-in, not network density, as the thing erosion would take away.

source: sec.gov

none

No moat source is demonstrated yet. Switching costs are the most likely candidate, since the leases are long (15 years at Black Pearl; Barber Lake now a 20-year contracted life) and each site has a single tenant. But the 10-K says tenant guarantees "will only be effective after rent commencement under such leases and are subject to certain limitations", and by August 2026 rent had begun at only one site. The advantages the 10-K claims are the company's own. It speaks of "industry-leading expertise in originating and securing industrial-scale, greenfield data center sites" and of securing West Texas land "on more favorable terms than in more established data center markets". The same document says "there is significant competition for power capacity and energized facilities". Intellectual property is modest: "four granted United States patents and one issued patent in Taiwan". With 66 full-time employees, Cipher has no scale advantage over the competitors it names: CoreWeave, Digital Realty, Equinix, Vantage Data Centers and Aligned Data Centers.

source: sec.gov

Leadership co leader

The 10-K contains no ranking, market-share figure, or claim of leadership, and it names no non-hyperscaler competitor by name. The band rests on disclosed scale — $4.7 billion of revenue, 13,328 customers, 9,060 employees across 36 countries — set against the filing's own statement that 'many of our competitors have substantially greater brand recognition, customer relationships, and financial, technical, and other resources than we do.' Co-leader among independent cloud data platforms; not a leader over AWS, Azure and GCP, which the filing says compete in all of its markets.

source: sec.gov

fast follower

No independent share or rank was found. The 10-K names CoreWeave, Digital Realty, Equinix, Vantage Data Centers and Aligned Data Centers as competitors, along with miners that have "signed leases with hyperscalers and HPC tenants": Hut 8, IREN, TeraWulf, Core Scientific and Applied Digital. Cipher has signed hyperscale-grade tenants (Amazon; Fluidstack with a Google backstop; a third investment-grade hyperscaler) but delivered its first HPC capacity only in August 2026 (Q2 2026 update). That makes it a fast follower. Its self-description as "a leading developer, owner, and operator of industrial-scale data centers" is the company's own claim and is not counted.

source: sec.gov

Pricing power moderate

The consumption model plus 125% net revenue retention shows real expansion pricing, and the filing argues it competes on 'pricing transparency and optimized price-performance.' But Item 1A limits how far that goes: competition 'may negatively impact our ability to acquire new customers ... put downward pressure on our prices and gross margins'; the company 'may not be able to ... offer as many discounts or free services as our competitors'; results depend on 'changes in our pricing model, including in response to significant price discounts by our competitors' and on 'customer optimization efforts that result in reduced consumption.' On the cost side, 'our costs and gross margins are significantly influenced by the prices we are able to negotiate with these public cloud providers, which in certain cases are also our competitors.'

source: sec.gov

weak

The 10-K says competition "has resulted in increasing competition and pricing pressure that may cause us to reduce our pricing in order to remain competitive". It adds that if customers cut usage "we may be compelled to lower our prices or risk losing a significant customer". At Barber Lake, Cipher agreed to absorb "the first $359.3 million of costs in excess of the initial budgeted amount", with the tenant reimbursing "50% of any such costs above that amount" (2026-09-25, Exhibit 99.1, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1819989/000181998926000043/barberlakeleaseamendmentpr.htm). Its one input-cost edge is specific to mining: Odessa's power costs about 2.8 c/kWh under the Luminant contract, available "until at least July 2027". A landlord that concedes cost overruns to its tenants has weak pricing power.

source: sec.gov

Summary

Snowflake's advantage in its FY2026 10-K rests on being the consolidation point for enterprise data: a multi-cluster shared-data architecture with proprietary columnar storage and automatic micro-partitioning, delivered across three major public clouds and 53 interconnected regional deployments, that customers adopt as a single governed source of truth and then expand on — 125% net revenue retention, 790 of the Forbes Global 2000 as customers. The filing layers a collaboration claim on top, with sharing 'generally without copying or moving the underlying data' and a Marketplace of 'hundreds of live, ready-to-query third-party data sets and data products.' The same document is unusually candid about the counter-pressure: Iceberg and open formats reduce lock-in by the company's own account, the three hyperscalers compete across every market while setting the cloud costs that 'significantly influence' gross margins, and frontier AI model providers 'may seek to vertically integrate ... by expanding into the data storage and management layers.'

Cipher built bitcoin mining data centres in Texas and is now developing single-tenant AI and HPC campuses for lease to hyperscalers. Its 10-K reports a portfolio of "4.2 gigawatts ("GW") of capacity across 10 sites". It lists a 15-year Amazon Web Services lease for about 300 MW of turnkey capacity at Black Pearl and a Fluidstack lease at Barber Lake (300 MW gross) under which Google "has agreed to backstop certain obligations of Fluidstack". It describes bitcoin mining at Odessa on a Luminant power contract at about 2.8 c/kWh. In 2026 it signed a third campus lease "with an investment-grade Hyperscale tenant" (Q1 2026 update, 2026-05-05), delivered first Black Pearl capacity in August "two months ahead of the original schedule" with rent commenced, and fully funded its Stingray development with a bond (Q2 2026 update). On 2026-09-25 it said Barber Lake's contracted life was extended from 10 to 20 years, taking contracted revenue at the site "from $3.8 billion to over $9 billion". The 10-K says Odessa was "the first bitcoin mining data center awarded the Management and Operations, or M&O, Stamp of Approval award from the Uptime Institute", which is independent recognition of how the company operates. Against this, the latest quarter's revenue was still bitcoin mining and fell to $25 million. The 10-K describes growing "competition and pricing pressure", single-tenant concentration, and termination rights for construction delays. The Barber Lake schedule was reset, and Cipher absorbs the first $359.3 million of cost overruns. Cipher's contracted pipeline is substantial, but a competitive advantage is not yet demonstrated, so it is rated as having no moat. That could change to narrow once its leased campuses are delivered and paying rent.

Chain position

Sits at the enterprise data and governance layer of the AI stack, and the AI exposure is explicit rather than incidental: the filing brands the product the 'AI Data Cloud,' lists AI as a product category, and put Snowflake Intelligence, Cortex Agents and a Managed MCP Server into general availability during the fiscal year. It is a buyer of hyperscaler compute and of third-party frontier models — 'strategic partnerships with foundational model providers deliver state-of-the-art models natively within Snowflake Cortex AI,' with stated 'model neutrality' — and a supplier of governed enterprise data and GPU-backed managed compute to AI applications built on top.

Cipher develops single-tenant, powered data-centre campuses for hyperscale and AI tenants: Amazon at Black Pearl, Fluidstack (backstopped by Google) at Barber Lake, and an unnamed investment-grade hyperscaler at a third campus. Meanwhile it winds down bitcoin mining.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Bitcoin mining (Odessa) Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • HPC data center leasing (Black Pearl, Barber Lake, Stingray) Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote +0.13 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm bearish

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →