VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

PRICE: 0 CENTS

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

QUALCOMM Incorporated

QCOM · NASDAQ Global Select Market

Market cap (USD)
SectorTechnology
CountryUS
Data as of
Moat score
70/ 100

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Spot something outdated?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

QUALCOMM is a fabless semiconductor and IP licensing company. Most revenue comes from QCT chip platforms across handsets, IoT, and automotive, while QTL generates high-margin licensing royalties from cellular standard-essential patents. Key moats include large engineering and R&D scale, integrated Snapdragon and Dragonwing platforms, long design and qualification cycles in automotive, and a broad cellular SEP portfolio supporting per-unit royalties under long-term license agreements. Key risks include customer concentration, OEM vertical integration, intense chipset competition, and regulatory or legal changes that could pressure licensing economics.

Primary segment

Handset chipsets (Snapdragon platforms)

Market structure

Oligopoly

Market share

22%-26% (estimated)

HHI:

Coverage

4 segments · 8 tags

Updated 2025-12-30

Segments

Handset chipsets (Snapdragon platforms)

Smartphone application processors and cellular modem/RF platforms

Revenue

62.8%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

22%-26% (estimated)

Peers

2454.TWAAPL005930.KS

Automotive silicon (connectivity, digital cockpit, ADAS/AD)

Automotive compute and connectivity platforms for infotainment and ADAS

Revenue

8.9%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

NVDAMBLYNXPI6723.T+1

IoT silicon (consumer, industrial, edge networking)

IoT connectivity SoCs and edge compute platforms

Revenue

14.9%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

weak

Share

Peers

NXPISTMTXNAVGO+1

Wireless technology licensing (cellular SEPs, royalties)

Cellular standard-essential patent licensing (3G/4G/5G) for devices

Revenue

12.6%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

strong

Share

Peers

NOKERICIDCC

Moat Claims

Handset chipsets (Snapdragon platforms)

Smartphone application processors and cellular modem/RF platforms

Oligopoly

Keystone Component

Supply

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Integrated Snapdragon platforms (processors and modems) are core components in premium-tier Android devices; mix shifts can lift ASPs and revenue per chipset.

Erosion risks

  • OEM vertical integration of application processors and modems
  • Aggressive competition (MediaTek, in-house silicon at large OEMs)
  • Smartphone unit stagnation or down-cycles

Leading indicators

  • Share of Android flagships using Snapdragon
  • Handset chipset ASP and mix trend
  • Concentration of revenue in top handset OEMs

Counterarguments

  • Major OEMs can and do dual-source or switch to competing chipsets
  • Customers may develop their own integrated circuit products

Capex Knowhow Scale

Supply

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Large engineering base and sustained R&D spend support rapid platform iteration (CPU, GPU, NPU, modem, RF) and performance-per-watt leadership in high-end mobile silicon.

Erosion risks

  • R&D arms race raises required spend and compresses returns
  • Compute architectures commoditize faster than expected
  • Talent retention and execution risk

Leading indicators

  • R&D as % of revenue and roadmap cadence
  • Time-to-market vs peers on new nodes
  • Performance-per-watt benchmarks in flagship devices

Counterarguments

  • Other large players can match R&D spend (Apple, Samsung, MediaTek, Google)
  • Foundry constraints can neutralize design advantages

Ecosystem Complements

Network

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Developer and OEM enablement around Snapdragon platforms improves software optimization and reduces friction adopting new silicon generations across device categories.

Erosion risks

  • Platform differentiation shifts to OS or app-layer where Qualcomm has less control
  • Open-source software reduces vendor-specific advantages

Leading indicators

  • OEM adoption of Qualcomm reference designs and platform features
  • Developer toolchain adoption and ecosystem partnerships

Counterarguments

  • Android OEMs can use common software stacks that reduce platform lock-in
  • Best-of-breed components can replace integrated platform approaches

Automotive silicon (connectivity, digital cockpit, ADAS/AD)

Automotive compute and connectivity platforms for infotainment and ADAS

Oligopoly

Design In Qualification

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Automotive programs have long validation and qualification cycles; design wins translate into multi-year shipment ramps tied to vehicle launches.

Erosion risks

  • OEM and Tier-1 shifts to competing compute platforms (e.g., NVIDIA, Mobileye)
  • Auto production volatility and model-cycle timing
  • Safety and regulatory setbacks in ADAS and AD programs

Leading indicators

  • Announced automotive design wins and launches
  • Automotive segment revenue growth and backlog commentary
  • Adoption of Snapdragon cockpit and ADAS platforms across OEMs

Counterarguments

  • Automotive OEMs can standardize on alternative platforms and reduce supplier count
  • Compute requirements may consolidate around a few dominant ecosystems

Ecosystem Complements

Network

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Snapdragon automotive platforms bundle compute and connectivity and can integrate with partner software stacks, easing OEM adoption across cockpit and ADAS roadmaps.

Erosion risks

  • Software platform fragmentation reduces reusability
  • OEMs bring more software in-house and commoditize silicon suppliers

Leading indicators

  • Partner ecosystem announcements (OS, middleware, OEM and Tier-1)
  • Platform attach across connectivity, cockpit, and ADAS within programs

Counterarguments

  • OEMs can mix-and-match suppliers for connectivity, cockpit, and ADAS separately
  • Integrated platform benefits may not outweigh OEM bargaining power

IoT silicon (consumer, industrial, edge networking)

IoT connectivity SoCs and edge compute platforms

Competitive

Scope Economies

Supply

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Qualcomm reuses core compute and connectivity IP (CPU, GPU, NPU, modem, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth) across handsets, automotive, and IoT, improving R&D leverage and time-to-market.

Erosion risks

  • Commoditization in mainstream IoT connectivity SoCs
  • Price pressure from low-cost competitors
  • Fragmented requirements reduce cross-platform reuse

Leading indicators

  • IoT revenue mix across consumer, industrial, and edge networking
  • Gross margin trend in IoT segment disclosures
  • Wins in higher-performance edge AI endpoints

Counterarguments

  • IoT market is fragmented with many substitutes and fast price erosion
  • Customers can shift to alternative MCU and SoC ecosystems

Ecosystem Complements

Network

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Dragonwing industrial and edge networking platforms plus developer support can reduce adoption friction for OEMs targeting connected edge devices.

Erosion risks

  • Standardized software stacks diminish platform differentiation
  • Channel and module partners reduce direct ecosystem influence

Leading indicators

  • Dragonwing platform adoption and partner ecosystem
  • Developer tools and SDK usage in IoT verticals

Counterarguments

  • Many IoT designs optimize for cost and will not pay for premium platforms
  • OEMs often prefer vendor-agnostic modules

Wireless technology licensing (cellular SEPs, royalties)

Cellular standard-essential patent licensing (3G/4G/5G) for devices

Oligopoly

IP Choke Point

Legal

Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 5/5 · 2 evidence

QTL monetizes a large cellular patent portfolio (including SEPs for LTE/5G) via per-unit royalties; royalties scale with licensee device sales.

Erosion risks

  • Changes to SEP and FRAND policy that reduce collectible royalties
  • Adverse court or regulatory rulings on licensing practices
  • Failure to refresh portfolio relevance in next-generation standards

Leading indicators

  • Renewals or renegotiations of major OEM licenses
  • Material changes in SDO IP policies
  • Licensing revenue and EBT margin trend

Counterarguments

  • Licensees and regulators may challenge royalty bases and rates
  • Competing SEP licensors also claim essential portfolios

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Major OEM patent licenses are generally multi-year, creating recurring royalty streams but requiring periodic renewal and renegotiation.

Erosion risks

  • License expirations and renegotiations reduce rates or scope
  • Large OEM disputes or non-payment periods

Leading indicators

  • Announcements of renewed licenses with major OEMs
  • Litigation and arbitration activity with key licensees
  • Royalty audit and collection outcomes

Counterarguments

  • OEMs can attempt to litigate, delay, or renegotiate royalties downward
  • Regulators may force changes to licensing practices

Evidence

sec_filing
QUALCOMM Incorporated FY2025 Form 10-K (ended 2025-09-28)

Higher handset revenues ... benefited from an increase in demand for premium-tier Snapdragon platforms in Android devices.

Supports the claim that Snapdragon platforms are key components in premium Android handsets and can command higher ASP and mix.

sec_filing
QUALCOMM Incorporated FY2025 Form 10-K (ended 2025-09-28)

QCT revenues mostly relate to sales of our Snapdragon and Dragonwing platforms (which include processors and modems)...

Shows Qualcomm sells integrated processor and modem platforms, reinforcing keystone component positioning.

sec_filing
QUALCOMM Incorporated FY2025 Form 10-K (ended 2025-09-28)

We have significant engineering resources... expertise in modem... advanced SoC... AI...

Directly supports the scale and know-how moat in core silicon and connectivity domains.

sec_filing
QUALCOMM Incorporated FY2025 Form 10-K (ended 2025-09-28)

Our research and development expenditures were $9.0 billion in fiscal 2025.

Quantifies sustained R&D investment that underpins technical iteration and platform breadth.

sec_filing
QUALCOMM Incorporated FY2025 Form 10-K (ended 2025-09-28)

We ... support developers to design and deploy their applications on our platforms across multiple device categories and industries...

Supports the presence of ecosystem complements via developer enablement and cross-category platform strategy.

Showing 5 of 16 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • OEM vertical integration of application processors and modems
  • Aggressive competition (MediaTek, in-house silicon at large OEMs)
  • Smartphone unit stagnation or down-cycles
  • R&D arms race raises required spend and compresses returns
  • Compute architectures commoditize faster than expected
  • Talent retention and execution risk

Leading indicators

  • Share of Android flagships using Snapdragon
  • Handset chipset ASP and mix trend
  • Concentration of revenue in top handset OEMs
  • R&D as % of revenue and roadmap cadence
  • Time-to-market vs peers on new nodes
  • Performance-per-watt benchmarks in flagship devices
Created 2025-12-30
Updated 2025-12-30

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.