VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Sunday, December 28, 2025
ASX Limited
ASX · ASX
Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.
Request update
Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.
Overview
ASX Limited is Australia's vertically integrated exchange and market-infrastructure operator across Listings, Markets (trading), Securities & Payments (clearing/settlement) and Technology & Data. The strongest moat sits in post-trade clearing and settlement, where licensed CS facilities and market-wide integration create a regulated, high-switching-cost structure. Trading and listings benefit from liquidity-driven network effects, but face an increasingly competitive and regulated landscape, including a growing rival venue (Cboe) and heightened scrutiny after CHESS-related operational incidents.
Primary segment
Markets
Market structure
Duopoly
Market share
80%-84% (reported)
HHI: 6,500
Coverage
4 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-28
Segments
Listings
Securities listing venue (equity and investment product listings)
Revenue
18.8%
Structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Markets
Trading venues for Australian cash equities and exchange-traded derivatives (futures, options)
Revenue
31.5%
Structure
Duopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
80%-84% (reported)
Peers
Technology & Data
Exchange information services (market data) and technical connectivity/technology services
Revenue
24.9%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Securities & Payments
Clearing, settlement and depository infrastructure for Australian securities (cash equities and fixed income)
Revenue
24.8%
Structure
Monopoly
Pricing
strong
Share
—
Peers
Moat Claims
Listings
Securities listing venue (equity and investment product listings)
Revenue share computed from ASX FY25 operating revenue by business: Listings A$208.0m of total operating revenue A$1,107.2m (FY ended 30 Jun 2025).
Concession License
Legal
Concession License
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Operating a listing market in Australia requires regulatory approval; the small number of licensed venues limits entry and supports ongoing listing-fee economics.
Erosion risks
- Listing competition from other licensed venues (e.g., Cboe) increases
- Regulatory reforms lower barriers or encourage dual listings
- IPO supply shifts to private markets or offshore exchanges
Leading indicators
- Share of new listings (count and value) captured by ASX vs rivals
- Net listings growth and delistings
- Listing-related revenue growth and fee schedule changes
Counterarguments
- Issuers can dual-list or list offshore, reducing dependence on ASX
- Listing rules and venue services can be replicated, pressuring fees if rivals gain traction
Two Sided Network
Network
Two Sided Network
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
A dominant pool of investor liquidity and market participants makes the primary venue more attractive for issuers; additional listings in turn deepen market breadth-supporting a two-sided network loop (issuer <-> investor/participant).
Erosion risks
- Trading and listing fragmentation reduces the liquidity advantage
- Regulatory interventions promote venue competition and interoperability
- Shift to private markets reduces listing-network relevance
Leading indicators
- ASX vs Cboe turnover share (dollar turnover)
- Market depth and spread metrics
- Dual-listing and migration events for large issuers
Counterarguments
- If order flow can be routed cheaply across venues, network effects weaken
- Large issuers can list elsewhere while still accessing Australian capital via intermediaries
Markets
Trading venues for Australian cash equities and exchange-traded derivatives (futures, options)
Revenue share computed from ASX FY25 operating revenue by business: Markets A$349.2m of total operating revenue A$1,107.2m (FY ended 30 Jun 2025).
Two Sided Network
Network
Two Sided Network
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Liquidity concentration and deep participant connectivity reinforce venue choice for on-book trading; this supports transaction and access-fee economics even with a competing venue.
Erosion risks
- Competitive pressure from Cboe or new entrants reduces market share and fees
- Higher off-book trading or alternative execution mechanisms reduce on-book economics
- Technology outages or latency issues reduce trust and participation
Leading indicators
- ASX cash equities turnover share and on-book share
- Order-to-trade ratio and market quality metrics (spreads, depth)
- System availability/outage incidents and remediation progress
Counterarguments
- Trading is already a duopoly; routing and fee competition can compress margins
- Volume and volatility are cyclical; fixed-cost leverage can cut both ways
Technology & Data
Exchange information services (market data) and technical connectivity/technology services
Revenue share computed from ASX FY25 operating revenue by business: Technology & Data A$275.6m of total operating revenue A$1,107.2m (FY ended 30 Jun 2025).
Data Workflow Lockin
Demand
Data Workflow Lockin
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
ASX market data and connectivity/technical services are embedded in trading, risk and compliance workflows; switching is possible but entails integration and vendor/process change, and many customers multi-home with global data providers.
Erosion risks
- Commoditization and fee pressure in market data
- Customers shift to cloud-based data distribution and analytics alternatives
- Regulatory scrutiny of market data pricing and access terms
Leading indicators
- Information services revenue growth and churn
- Connectivity and co-location demand
- Regulatory or industry reviews of market data fees
Counterarguments
- Customers can substitute with alternative data vendors and analytics stacks
- Multi-homing reduces switching-cost leverage and limits pricing power
Securities & Payments
Clearing, settlement and depository infrastructure for Australian securities (cash equities and fixed income)
Revenue share computed from ASX FY25 operating revenue by business: Securities & Payments A$274.4m of total operating revenue A$1,107.2m (FY ended 30 Jun 2025).
Concession License
Legal
Concession License
Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 5/5 · 3 evidence
Post-trade clearing and settlement is highly permissioned and supervised; ASX's CS facilities operate under Corporations Act licences with oversight by ASIC and the RBA's Financial Stability Standards framework.
Erosion risks
- Regulatory reforms introduce competition or mandated interoperability in clearing/settlement
- Operational risk incidents reduce regulator confidence and force structural remedies
- Policy changes reduce permitted fee models for CS services
Leading indicators
- RBA/ASIC assessment findings and conformance ratings
- New rules or legislation on CS competition and access
- Operational incidents (e.g., batch settlement failures) and remediation progress
Counterarguments
- A licence moat is only as strong as ongoing regulator confidence; oversight can impose costly requirements
- Competition can be introduced by policy even in a natural-monopoly industry
Switching Costs General
Demand
Switching Costs General
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Clearing/settlement involves market-wide participant integration and operational processes (e.g., settlement and share registration), making replacement or migration complex and costly for the ecosystem.
Erosion risks
- Successful alternative CS infrastructure backed by policy or major participants
- Mandatory open access to settlement services reduces lock-in economics
- Significant outages accelerate industry push to change providers
Leading indicators
- Industry consultations on CS competition/interoperability
- Participant migration pilots or alternative settlement initiatives
- Frequency/severity of CHESS incidents and contingency performance
Counterarguments
- Switching costs can be overcome if regulators mandate migration timelines and standards
- Alternative post-trade models (e.g., interoperability layers) can reduce dependency without full replacement
Evidence
there are now four exchanges in Australia licensed to list securities: ASX, Cboe, the National Stock Exchange of Australia (NSX), and the Sydney Stock Exchange (SSX).
Shows listing-market access is permissioned and limited to a small set of licensed venues.
ASIC approved Cboe Australia's listing application on 7 October 2025.
Demonstrates listings-market status is regulated and granted via ASIC approval.
In the September 2025 quarter, ASX accounted for 82.1% of the total dollar turnover in equity market products.
High turnover share indicates liquidity concentration that can reinforce issuer preference for the dominant venue (network-effect inference).
In the September 2025 quarter, ASX accounted for 82.1% of the total dollar turnover in equity market products. Cboe accounted for the remaining 17.9%...
Shows a duopoly with ASX as the dominant liquidity pool, consistent with a trading network effect.
Markets 349.2 (Operating revenue by business, FY25).
Used to compute segment revenue share and size of the Markets business.
Showing 5 of 12 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Listing competition from other licensed venues (e.g., Cboe) increases
- Regulatory reforms lower barriers or encourage dual listings
- IPO supply shifts to private markets or offshore exchanges
- Trading and listing fragmentation reduces the liquidity advantage
- Regulatory interventions promote venue competition and interoperability
- Shift to private markets reduces listing-network relevance
Leading indicators
- Share of new listings (count and value) captured by ASX vs rivals
- Net listings growth and delistings
- Listing-related revenue growth and fee schedule changes
- ASX vs Cboe turnover share (dollar turnover)
- Market depth and spread metrics
- Dual-listing and migration events for large issuers
Curation & Accuracy
This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).
Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.