Compare moats

Graded on the Item 1A text this run could read from the FY2026 10-K, which is where the filing argues hardest against a wide band. It says "each of our segments competes for customers, employees, digital prominence, products and services" with local, regional, national and global physical, eCommerce and omnichannel retailers, social commerce platforms, wholesale club operators, retail intermediaries "and emerging agentic shopping tools and platforms," that "the omnichannel retail landscape is highly competitive and rapidly evolving, and the entry of new, well-funded competitors, or more rapid development of AI capabilities and agentic tools by these competitors ... may increase competitive pressures," and concedes that "for eCommerce and other internet-based businesses, newer or smaller businesses may be better able to innovate and compete with us" and that there "can be no assurance" Walmart can adopt AI "as quickly or effectively as our competitors." It also warns of retail consolidation producing rivals with "improved financial resources, improved access to merchandise, greater market penetration." The filing claims no market share, rank or scale advantage anywhere in the text available here, and its own competitive-landscape discussion sits in Item 1, which the cached read-through returned only as a cross-reference; a wider band would not be sourced.

source: sec.gov

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

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

What the readable text does describe as durable is physical and logistical scale rather than lock-in or IP. It says Walmart sources "from a wide variety of domestic and international suppliers," that global sourcing is "an important factor in our financial performance," and that finding suppliers able to supply "in the large volumes we may demand" is itself a challenge; it describes a network of stores, clubs and distribution and fulfillment centers in which "many products available for purchase online can be picked up by the customer or member at a local Walmart store or Sam's Club, which provides additional customer traffic at such stores and clubs"; and it lists "supply chain automation and enhancements" among the investments backing the strategy. The first competitive lever it names is "the prices at which we sell our merchandise." The filing offers no intangibles or switching-cost claim beyond noting that protection of its trademarks, copyrights, domain names, patents and trade secrets "may not be available in every jurisdiction."

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

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

The 10-K text available this run asserts no rank or share for Walmart. The band reflects two things the filing does say: that its strategy is meant to let it "maintain or grow our overall market position" across segments that already compete at global scale, and that it does not describe itself as ahead in the channels that matter most to it - "for eCommerce and other internet-based businesses, newer or smaller businesses may be better able to innovate and compete with us," and on AI adoption "there can be no assurance that these investments will deliver the anticipated benefits, or that we will be able to adopt and leverage these technologies as quickly or effectively as our competitors." Treat this band as bounded by the missing Item 1 competition discussion, not as a measured position.

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

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

The filing names price first among the ways it competes - "we compete in a variety of ways, including the prices at which we sell our merchandise" - and states that higher supplier labour and material costs may "adversely impact product margins ... that we are unable, or choose not, to pass on to our customers." It adds that macro conditions can "change the mix of products we sell to any one or more markets with a lower average gross margin" and "result in slower inventory turnover and greater markdowns of inventory." In health and wellness the price is set by counterparties, not by Walmart: "a large majority of our retail pharmacy net sales are generated by filling prescriptions for which we receive payment through established contractual relationships with third-party payers and payment administrators, such as private insurers, governmental agencies and pharmacy benefit managers," exposing it to "reductions in the third-party reimbursement rates for drugs."

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

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

A retailer that also intermediates: it sells its own sourced merchandise, hosts third-party marketplace sellers for whom it may provide "fulfillment, inventory management, tax collection, payment processing, content," sells digital advertising against that traffic, dispenses prescriptions under PBM and payer contracts, and offers financial services "including through our digital channels, stores and clubs, as well as our OnePay fintech venture."

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.

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.

• Advertising Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Retail pharmacy and health and wellness Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Sam's Club Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Walmart International (including Flipkart) Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Walmart U.S. Unknown · Moderate source: sec.gov
• eCommerce and third-party marketplace Unknown · Low source: sec.gov

• 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

• Analytics Top 3 · Deep source: sec.gov
• Data Engineering Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Cortex AI Challenger · Moderate source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Marketplace and Data Collaboration Leader · Deep source: sec.gov
• Snowflake Postgres and Unistore Niche · Low source: sec.gov
• Snowpark and Native Application Framework Niche · 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 →