VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Wednesday, December 31, 2025
ANSYS, Inc.
ANSS · Nasdaq Global Select Market
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Spot something outdated?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
ANSYS, Inc. develops and markets engineering simulation software and services used across industrial and high-tech workflows. The company was acquired by Synopsys in July 2025 and its former NASDAQ listing (ANSS) was suspended shortly after. The core moat is demand-driven: embedded workflows with high renewal dynamics and a broad multiphysics platform that supports suite bundling. In semiconductor sign-off tooling, qualification and foundry certification raise switching costs and reinforce incumbency. Adjacent offerings include digital mission engineering and safety-certified embedded software/cybersecurity analysis tooling.
Primary segment
Core Multiphysics Simulation Platform (CAE)
Market structure
Oligopoly
Market share
—
HHI: —
Coverage
3 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-31
Segments
Core Multiphysics Simulation Platform (CAE)
Multiphysics engineering simulation (CAE) software
Revenue
—
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Electronics & Semiconductor Simulation (EDA-adjacent)
Electronics and semiconductor simulation / sign-off (power integrity, EM, photonics)
Revenue
—
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
strong
Share
—
Peers
Digital Mission Engineering & Safety-Critical Tooling
Digital mission engineering, safety analysis, and safety-certified embedded software tooling
Revenue
—
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Moat Claims
Core Multiphysics Simulation Platform (CAE)
Multiphysics engineering simulation (CAE) software
Suite Bundling
Demand
Suite Bundling
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence
Ansys positions its offering as a unified multiphysics platform spanning many physics domains, which supports selling multi-product bundles and enterprise-wide deployments rather than isolated point tools.
Erosion risks
- Aggressive suite bundling by CAD/PLM incumbents
- Cloud-native and open-source alternatives improving
- Procurement-driven unbundling in cost-down cycles
Leading indicators
- Multi-product deal mix trend
- Average contract duration trend
- ACV growth vs. customer count growth
Counterarguments
- Best-of-breed point solvers can win in specific niches
- Large incumbents (e.g., Siemens/Dassault) also offer integrated suites
Switching Costs General
Demand
Switching Costs General
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence
Mission-critical simulation is embedded in engineering workflows and programs, with long-lived models/processes and high retraining/revalidation costs; recurring contracts with strong renewal dynamics suggest meaningful customer lock-in.
Erosion risks
- Customer standardization onto competitor platforms after M&A
- Increased use of internal or open tooling in cost-cutting environments
- Talent mobility reducing tool-specific switching friction over time
Leading indicators
- Renewal rate and churn disclosures (if resumed post-merger)
- Net expansion / upsell indicators (ACV recurring growth)
- Discounting intensity in renewals
Counterarguments
- Enterprises can and do dual-source simulation tools
- Switching may be feasible at major program resets or new platform launches
Data Workflow Lockin
Demand
Data Workflow Lockin
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Knowledge management and simulation process tooling can increase lock-in by centralizing simulation artifacts, traceability, and cross-team workflows around the platform.
Erosion risks
- Customer preference for vendor-neutral PLM/ALM data layers
- Interoperability and open APIs reducing lock-in
- Cloud platforms (hyperscalers) commoditizing workflow layers
Leading indicators
- Attach rate of workflow/knowledge management tooling
- Integrations with third-party lifecycle tools
- Customer references citing traceability/digital thread outcomes
Counterarguments
- Engineering orgs may treat workflow tooling as optional and keep data in neutral repositories
Electronics & Semiconductor Simulation (EDA-adjacent)
Electronics and semiconductor simulation / sign-off (power integrity, EM, photonics)
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence
In semiconductor sign-off workflows, tool qualification and foundry certification create very high barriers to switching; being embedded in sign-off makes the software difficult to displace once designed-in.
Erosion risks
- Competing sign-off solutions gaining foundry certification
- Platform bundling pressure from EDA suite incumbents
- Regulatory remedies or divestitures reducing product scope
Leading indicators
- Foundry certification breadth for new nodes
- Win/loss commentary in semiconductor sign-off deals
- Design starts in advanced packaging / 3D-IC
Counterarguments
- Large customers can mandate multi-vendor sign-off strategies
- Foundries can certify competing tools if demand warrants
De Facto Standard
Network
De Facto Standard
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Described as a 'gold standard' in a key sign-off niche, which can produce standardization benefits and strong incumbency advantages.
Erosion risks
- Standards shifting with new architectures (chiplets/3D-IC) and new verification paradigms
- EDA incumbents bundling sign-off into broader suites
Leading indicators
- Mentions of 'gold standard' positioning in technical ecosystems and foundry collateral
- Customer migrations at major node transitions
Counterarguments
- 'Gold standard' language may reflect marketing and may not imply dominance in every sub-segment
Ecosystem Complements
Network
Ecosystem Complements
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Interoperability with third-party platforms and design automation tools plus cloud/HPC scaling can make the product easier to embed into existing EDA ecosystems (complements moat), increasing adoption and stickiness.
Erosion risks
- Interoperability can reduce switching costs by enabling easier substitution
- Hyperscaler-native workflows could weaken vendor ecosystem positioning
Leading indicators
- Number/quality of integrations in EDA workflows
- Cloud-based deployment adoption in sign-off workloads
Counterarguments
- Ecosystem integration is table stakes in EDA and may not be a differentiator
Digital Mission Engineering & Safety-Critical Tooling
Digital mission engineering, safety analysis, and safety-certified embedded software tooling
Compliance Advantage
Legal
Compliance Advantage
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Safety-critical embedded software tooling that supports automated certification can create compliance-related differentiation and reduce customer burden versus general-purpose tools.
Erosion risks
- Standards changes requiring retooling and recertification
- Competition from incumbents in model-based engineering toolchains
- Government procurement shifts and budget volatility
Leading indicators
- Adoption in safety-critical programs (aerospace/rail/automotive)
- References to certification time/cost reductions in customer cases
Counterarguments
- Some organizations rely on internal processes and general-purpose tools for certification artifacts
Switching Costs General
Demand
Switching Costs General
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Once embedded in long-lived, safety-critical programs, tool and workflow changes are costly (retraining, revalidation, and process updates), which raises switching frictions.
Erosion risks
- Program resets enabling tool replacement
- Move to open standards and interoperable model formats
Leading indicators
- Retention/renewal performance in safety-critical verticals
- Growth in program-level deployments vs. pilot projects
Counterarguments
- Switching can happen at major platform refreshes or supplier re-competes
Data Workflow Lockin
Demand
Data Workflow Lockin
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Mission-level modeling and simulation that spans many phases of the lifecycle can become a central workflow layer, making it harder to replace without disrupting planning, verification, and operations modeling.
Erosion risks
- Customers consolidating on broader systems engineering platforms
- Interoperability reducing lock-in to any single vendor
Leading indicators
- Expansion from modeling into operations/mission planning use cases
- Integrations with customer ecosystems and data sources
Counterarguments
- Some customers keep mission modeling in-house or on government platforms
Evidence
unified engineering simulation environment
Supports the claim that Ansys sells a platform spanning multiple physics domains, enabling suite-style bundling.
high rate of customer renewal
Supports the idea of sticky recurring relationships (renewal-heavy maintenance/subscription contracts), consistent with switching costs.
critical simulation data
Supports that Ansys offers tooling intended to secure and manage simulation artifacts/workflows, increasing workflow/data stickiness.
analysis and sign-off
Supports that Ansys describes a flagship EDA tool used for IC analysis and sign-off, consistent with qualification-driven switching costs.
gold standard
Supports the claim of strong incumbency/standard positioning in a sign-off use case.
Showing 5 of 9 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Aggressive suite bundling by CAD/PLM incumbents
- Cloud-native and open-source alternatives improving
- Procurement-driven unbundling in cost-down cycles
- Customer standardization onto competitor platforms after M&A
- Increased use of internal or open tooling in cost-cutting environments
- Talent mobility reducing tool-specific switching friction over time
Leading indicators
- Multi-product deal mix trend
- Average contract duration trend
- ACV growth vs. customer count growth
- Renewal rate and churn disclosures (if resumed post-merger)
- Net expansion / upsell indicators (ACV recurring growth)
- Discounting intensity in renewals
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.