VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Wednesday, December 31, 2025
VeriSign, Inc.
VRSN · 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Spot something outdated?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
VeriSign is a critical internet infrastructure company whose economics are dominated by operating the .com and .net registries (domain registrations and authoritative DNS). The core moat is legal: ICANN agreements (and the U.S. DOC Cooperative Agreement for .com) grant it the registry operator role, creating monopoly market structure for those TLDs. Demand-side persistence also matters: .com is the largest TLD by registrations, supporting renewal behavior and the ability to price within contractual caps. Operational reliability (root zone maintainer services and root server operations) reinforces trust and reduces replacement risk at contract renewal. Primary pressures are internet behavior shifts (apps/AI reducing URL navigation), growth of alternative TLDs/namespaces, and regulatory or political intervention in pricing.
Primary segment
Naming Services (.com and .net registry)
Market structure
Monopoly
Market share
100% (reported)
HHI: 10,000
Coverage
1 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-31
Segments
Naming Services (.com and .net registry)
Registry operator services for .com and .net top-level domains (domain registrations + authoritative DNS resolution)
Revenue
100%
Structure
Monopoly
Pricing
strong
Share
100% (reported)
Peers
—
Moat Claims
Naming Services (.com and .net registry)
Registry operator services for .com and .net top-level domains (domain registrations + authoritative DNS resolution)
VeriSign reports one reportable segment and states substantially all revenue is derived from operating the .com and .net gTLDs under the relevant agreements.
Concession License
Legal
Concession License
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
ICANN registry agreements (and, for .com, a U.S. DOC Cooperative Agreement) grant VeriSign the right to operate .com and .net; the .com agreement is renewed through Nov 30, 2030 with presumptive renewal and limited termination conditions.
Erosion risks
- ICANN termination or non-renewal for breach or governance change
- Government/ICANN changes to pricing provisions or contract terms
- Political/antitrust scrutiny of wholesale pricing and monopoly status
Leading indicators
- ICANN and DOC/NTIA renewal timelines, notices, and public comment outcomes
- Changes to registry agreement pricing/renewal/termination clauses
- ICANN compliance findings and SLA/performance audit results
Counterarguments
- This is a granted concession; it is not technologically exclusive and could be rebid if policy shifts
- Regulators could pressure wholesale price caps downward despite contract language
De Facto Standard
Network
De Facto Standard
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
.com's massive installed base and default recognition support continued demand and renewal behavior, even with many alternative TLD options.
Erosion risks
- Shift from websites to apps/social platforms reducing need for domains
- Faster growth of ccTLDs and new gTLDs vs .com/.net
- AI/search/browser UX reducing direct navigation by domain name
Leading indicators
- Net adds / churn in .com base and renewal rate trends
- Share of new registrations choosing ccTLDs or new gTLDs
- Evidence of browser/search/AI-driven navigation reducing URL usage
Counterarguments
- Many businesses can operate primarily on platform identities (social, marketplaces) without a domain
- New gTLDs and ccTLDs can be more relevant locally or category-specific, capturing incremental demand
Operational Excellence
Supply
Operational Excellence
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Operating mission-critical DNS infrastructure (including Root Zone Maintainer services and two of 13 root servers) plus meeting stringent SLAs supports trust and reduces replacement risk in renewals.
Erosion risks
- Material security breach, prolonged outage, or SLA failures
- Concentration of critical infrastructure in limited geographies
- Escalating cyber/physical threats to DNS infrastructure
Leading indicators
- Publicly disclosed incidents and SLA availability metrics
- ICANN audits and compliance reports
- Frequency/severity of DDoS or other attacks impacting DNS services
Counterarguments
- Other operators can build highly available DNS infrastructure; operational excellence may be table stakes
- The legal concession, not technical capability, is the primary driver of monopoly economics
Float Prepayment
Financial
Float Prepayment
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Up-front payment for multi-year registrations creates deferred revenue and strong cash conversion (customer prepayment float).
Erosion risks
- Lower renewals/new registrations reducing deferred revenue base
- Contract or billing-term changes that reduce prepayment
- Higher refunds/chargebacks from registrar channel issues
Leading indicators
- Deferred revenue balance and cash-from-operations vs net income
- Renewal rate and net adds trends
- Registrar concentration and credit risk signals
Counterarguments
- Prepayment float is common in subscription-like businesses and is not unique to VeriSign
- In a monopoly registry, float improves cash flow but is not the core barrier to entry
Evidence
"...we will remain the sole registry operator for the .com registry through November 30, 2030."
Direct support for a government/ICANN-granted monopoly position in .com registry services.
".net Registry Agreement ... renewed on June 29, 2023 ... must be renewed or extended by July 1, 2029."
Shows the contractual concession underpinning the .net registry business.
"Our .com and .net Registry Agreements contain 'presumptive' rights of renewal..."
Supports durability of the concession, while still highlighting renewal/termination as key risks.
"As of Dec. 31, 2024, the .com domain name base totaled 156.3 million..."
Large installed base supports the view that .com is a de facto standard namespace.
"As of December 31, 2024, we had 169.0 million .com and .net registrations..."
Company-reported scale reinforces demand-side inertia for the legacy TLDs it operates.
Showing 5 of 10 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- ICANN termination or non-renewal for breach or governance change
- Government/ICANN changes to pricing provisions or contract terms
- Political/antitrust scrutiny of wholesale pricing and monopoly status
- Shift from websites to apps/social platforms reducing need for domains
- Faster growth of ccTLDs and new gTLDs vs .com/.net
- AI/search/browser UX reducing direct navigation by domain name
Leading indicators
- ICANN and DOC/NTIA renewal timelines, notices, and public comment outcomes
- Changes to registry agreement pricing/renewal/termination clauses
- ICANN compliance findings and SLA/performance audit results
- Net adds / churn in .com base and renewal rate trends
- Share of new registrations choosing ccTLDs or new gTLDs
- Evidence of browser/search/AI-driven navigation reducing URL usage
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.