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 Tempus AI×Hut 8×GitLab× maximum of 3 — remove one to swap
Tempus AI TEM ai moat: latest change 2026-02-24 Hut 8 HUT ai moat: latest change 2026-02-25 GitLab GTLB ai moat: latest change 2026-08-05
Moat rating narrow

The FY2025 10-K documents a real asset: a network "connected in some way to more than 55% of all oncologists practicing in the United States" and "more than 65% of all academic medical centers," via "more than 700 unique data connections" across "more than 5,000 healthcare institution sites," with "broad data rights, including the rights to longitudinally updated data." Not eroding: revenue $693.4M to $1,271.8M (+83%), net loss narrowed from $705.8M to $245.0M. Not wide: still loss-making against "an accumulated deficit of $2.4 billion," with payment received on only "approximately 55% of our clinical oncology NGS tests and 50% of our hereditary tests."

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2025 10-K says 'we believe we have established a defensible competitive advantage through our power-first, innovation-driven strategy', resting on a power-native team, an application-agnostic framework for digital infrastructure design, end-to-end greenfield development capabilities, and the use of ASIC compute builds to rapidly and cost-effectively secure and monetize power. What separates this from no moat is scarce power: the filing says demand for energy capacity continues to outpace supply and that 'grid interconnection bottlenecks have further constrained access to power and digital infrastructure development', and Hut 8 reports 330 MW of utility capacity under construction at River Bend, commercialized in December 2025 through a 15-year triple-net lease supporting 245 MW of IT capacity, plus 1,230 MW of utility capacity under development. The same filing says 'The industries in which we operate are highly competitive and continuously evolving.', warns that these factors 'might not provide the competitive advantage we anticipate, or if they do, such competitive advantage might not endure', cites the River Bend lease (valued at $7.0 billion over the base term) as an example of expecting a significant portion of revenue from a limited number of customers, and says the company has not maintained consistent profitability. That supports narrow at most, not wide.

source: sec.gov

narrow

The FY2026 10-K (year ended 2026-01-31) shows real expansion inside the installed base: 118% Dollar-Based Net Retention, Base Customers up to 10,682 from 9,893, customers above $100,000 of ARR up to 1,456 from 1,229, and $1.0 million ARR customers "to 155 from 123, an increase of 26%". But the filing concedes "limited barriers to entry" and names "Microsoft Corporation, which owns GitHub" as principal competitor. Retention decelerates (130% FY2024, 123% FY2025, 118% FY2026), and since DBNR is reported "on a threshold basis of 130%," the FY2024 figure is a cap and the slide is steeper than it looks. Narrow, not wide: expansion must be re-won against a bundled hyperscaler.

source: sec.gov

Moat type network effects

The filing states the mechanism: "Each product line is designed to enable and enhance the other, thereby creating network effects." That is the filing's own characterisation, so the rating rests on corroborating facts: 700+ data connections across 5,000+ sites with longitudinal rights; roughly 801,000 tests in FY2025 (about 340,500 Oncology) feeding the records Insights licenses; Insights working with "19 of the 20 largest public pharmaceutical companies based on 2024 revenue" at "approximately 126%" net revenue retention. Intangibles fit less well: the xT PMA, ADLT status, Paige's clearance and five CAP/CLIA labs are real, but named peers hold comparable approvals.

source: sec.gov

cost scale

The 10-K says 'we believe success depends on the ability to secure scarce assets like power, data center equipment, and customers', and places part of its claimed edge in 'our ability to use ASIC compute infrastructure development to rapidly and cost-effectively secure and monetize power'. Its examples: Vega was energized less than a year after acquisition for an all-in cost of about $455,000 per megawatt, which the filing calls 'a fraction of traditional data center costs', and Salt Creek was completed for about $250,000 per MW; Vega also has immediate access to some of the lowest locational wholesale power prices in North America. These are low-redundancy ASIC compute builds, which the 10-K says carry relatively low capital intensity by design. The 'fraction of traditional data center costs' comparison is against a different facility tier, and the filing gives no peer cost comparison and no cost figure for its AI campuses.

source: sec.gov

switching costs

Stickiness comes from platform embedding, not IP. The 10-K rests differentiation on "our single platform with a unified data model," on "Consolidation of multiple tools into a single platform," and on deployment inside the customer's own perimeter for regulated buyers. Replacement means re-integrating a toolchain and re-certifying compliance. IP is the wrong label: only "16 issued patents and 25 pending patent applications," plus open-source licenses granting "broad permissions to use, copy, modify, and redistribute." The no-lock-in claim is the filing's own characterisation, footnoted to a Forrester study "commissioned by GitLab."

source: sec.gov

Leadership at parity

The filing claims no ranked lead; its positional language is hedged, as in "one of the largest sequencers of cancer patients... in the United States." Two disclosures cut the other way: the reimbursement goal is to become "more in line with other NGS providers who have adopted similar strategies, such as FMI and Guardant," and competitors "may have longer operating histories; larger customer bases; greater brand recognition and market penetration." Competition names Foundation Medicine (Roche), Caris, Guardant, Natera, Neogenomics, Quest, LabCorp, Flatiron, IQVIA, ConcertAI and major CROs, all unranked. Scaled positions on both sides support parity, not a top position.

source: sec.gov

fast follower

The 10-K says 'For example, we signed our first large scale single tenant AI data center lease and commenced construction of the site at our River Bend campus.', offered under the statement that to remain competitive with peers it may need to modify aspects of its business model. River Bend was commercialized in December 2025 through a 15-year triple-net lease supporting 245 MW of IT capacity; Fluidstack is expected to serve as tenant and Google is expected to provide a financial backstop, and initial delivery is targeted for Q2 2027. On speed, the filing says 'Through early engagement with Entergy Louisiana, we assumed key interconnection and development functions typically managed by the utility, such as the development of transmission and distribution infrastructure, materially accelerating originally quoted power delivery timelines.', and that Vega was energized 'less than a year after acquiring it'. It also warns that Hut 8 competes against companies 'that may be more established or have greater financial and other resources and/or expertise'. That describes a newer entrant moving quickly, not an established leader.

source: sec.gov

fast follower

The 10-K positions GitLab against a leader rather than as one: "Our principal competitor is Microsoft Corporation, which owns GitHub." Competition reads from the challenger side, differentiating "from GitHub through flexible deployment options that work within enterprise security and compliance requirements, LLM neutrality with self-hosted gateway support" and an open core model. On AI it follows: Duo Agent Platform went "Generally available in January 2026," the last month of the fiscal year. What keeps it a follower rather than behind is cadence, "a new version of our software every month for 172 months in a row," plus a regulated-deployment franchise a SaaS-first rival does not cover.

source: sec.gov

Pricing power weak

Diagnostics prices are administered: after a CPT code is set, "CMS, establish payment levels and coverage rules under Medicare," delegating to MACs, while "Private payers establish their rates and coverage rules independently." Average revenue per Oncology test rose from about $1,510 to about $1,600, "driven primarily by increased Medicare reimbursement rates" — the payer moved the price. Collection came on "approximately 55% of our clinical oncology NGS tests and 50% of our hereditary tests," and payer "cost-saving initiatives... are likely to result in pricing pressures." The moderate pocket is confined to Data and applications ($316.4M of $1,271.8M).

source: sec.gov

weak

The 10-K says ASIC compute, run through American Bitcoin, can only be profitable if hardware and electricity costs are below the price of the Bitcoin mined, which makes it a price-taking business. It also says Traditional Cloud and AI Cloud compete with cloud services providers for customers, and that the company has not maintained consistent profitability. River Bend's contracted triple-net lease economics are not in service yet; initial delivery is targeted for Q2 2027.

source: sec.gov

moderate

FY2026 gross margin was 87% against 89%, with cost of revenue up $35.6 million "primarily due to an increase of $18.4 million in third party hosting costs for SaaS and cloud usage," and management expects SaaS and Duo mix to bring costs that "may adversely impact our gross margins." Strain is explicit: GitLab "may be required to reduce our prices," competitors "may offer their products and services at a lower price or for free," and it "implemented user limits on our free SaaS product." Power retained: Premium lists at $29 per user/month billed annually, and seats bundle $12 and $24 of GitLab Credits. But "A majority of our subscriptions are on a one-year period."

source: sec.gov

Summary

Tempus AI's durable asset is an installed provider network and the longitudinal data rights attached to it, not any single assay: connections to more than 55% of practicing U.S. oncologists and more than 65% of academic medical centers, 700+ data connections across 5,000+ institution sites. That network makes the linked clinical-molecular database sellable — Insights serves 19 of the 20 largest public pharmaceutical companies by 2024 revenue at roughly 126% net revenue retention, and the trial network (1,400+ trials signed, 40,000+ patients identified) depends on the sequencing base. Economics are improving: revenue up 83% to $1.27B, net loss down from $705.8M to $245.0M. It stops short of wide on the filing's own terms — a $2.4B accumulated deficit, payment on only ~55% of oncology and ~50% of hereditary tests, and Diagnostics prices set by CMS, MACs and private payers.

Per its FY2025 10-K, Hut 8 is a power-first infrastructure developer. It originates powered land and interconnections, uses ASIC compute builds, which the filing says combine relatively low capital intensity with rapid deployment, as a transitional load to monetize sites sooner, and aims to transition suitable power assets to higher-return uses; its River Bend campus was commercialized through a 15-year AI data center lease. The filing claims a defensible advantage but warns it might not provide the advantage anticipated, or might not endure. It says Hut 8 competes for powered land with digital infrastructure developers and large-scale Bitcoin miners, and its first AI campus is still under construction. Its majority-owned Bitcoin miner, American Bitcoin, can only be profitable when mining costs are below the price of the Bitcoin mined, and the filing says it believes American Bitcoin must keep acquiring miners to keep up with a growing global network hashrate.

GitLab sells a single-platform DevSecOps toolchain defended by workflow lock-in rather than intellectual property: a unified data model plus deployment flexibility, including single-tenant "Dedicated for Government with FedRAMP compliance," makes it hard to remove where data residency is contractual. The installed base expands: 118% Dollar-Based Net Retention, 10,682 Base Customers, 1,456 above $100,000 of ARR, 155 above $1.0 million (up 26%), over 70% of ARR from public sector and enterprise. The filing supplies the counterweight: "limited barriers to entry," Microsoft/GitHub as principal competitor, 16 issued patents. Retention (130 to 123 to 118, the 130 a cap), gross margin (89% to 87%) and a January 2026 AI launch point to compression at the commodity end. No source measures market share, so every share band is "unknown".

Chain position

Tempus sits between clinical care and pharma R&D. It ingests data from 5,000+ institution sites, runs five CAP/CLIA labs (Chicago, Atlanta, Raleigh, Aliso Viejo, Minneapolis via OneOme), and sells Diagnostics to providers and payers ($955.4M FY2025, +111%, administered) and Data and applications to pharma ($316.4M, +31%, negotiated). The clinical output is the data business's input.

Power-first developer building AI data center capacity, beginning with River Bend under a 15-year lease (Fluidstack is the expected tenant and Google is expected to provide a financial backstop; initial delivery is targeted for Q2 2027), and runs Bitcoin mining through majority-owned American Bitcoin.

GitLab sits at the software-tooling layer, not compute or models. It consumes third-party LLM capacity — marketing "LLM neutrality and support for self-hosted AI gateways, including air-gapped environments" — so it captures no model-layer economics and bears inference as COGS, visible in the $18.4 million rise in hosting costs. Its distinctive position is the regulated perimeter.

Products (share / barrier)
  • Enterprise Agile Planning add-on Unknown · Low source: sec.gov
  • GitLab Dedicated (including Dedicated for Government) Unknown · Deep source: sec.gov
  • GitLab DevSecOps Platform (Free, Premium, and Ultimate tiers) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
  • GitLab Duo Agent Platform (with GitLab Credits) Unknown · Low source: about.gitlab.com
  • Self-Managed GitLab (on-premises and hybrid cloud deployment) Unknown · Deep source: sec.gov
Long-horizon vote -0.01 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

-0.01 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →

+0.06 at weight 0.20 · swarm neutral

Editorial prior, not backtested.

see exactly how it voted →