VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Tuesday, December 30, 2025
Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
6981 · Tokyo Stock Exchange
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Spot something outdated?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
Murata Manufacturing is a Japan-listed electronic components leader, with revenue concentrated in capacitors (especially MLCC) and high-frequency devices/communications modules. The core moat in MLCC is supply-side: accumulated process/yield know-how and scale/capex to sustain capacity and leadership, with additional stickiness from automotive qualification. In RF filtering, Murata cites very high share in communications SAW filters and strengthens its IP/process position via technology acquisitions (e.g., Resonant/XBAR). Batteries and functional devices are more competitive, with weaker structural moats and greater pressure from large incumbents.
Primary segment
Capacitors (primarily MLCC)
Market structure
Oligopoly
Market share
38%-42% (reported)
HHI: —
Coverage
6 segments · 9 tags
Updated 2025-12-30
Segments
Capacitors (primarily MLCC)
Multilayer ceramic capacitors (MLCC) and related capacitors
Revenue
47.7%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
38%-42% (reported)
Peers
Inductors and EMI Filters
Inductors and electromagnetic interference (EMI) suppression components
Revenue
11.5%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
High-Frequency Devices and Communications Modules
RF filters and front-end components (e.g., SAW) and communications/connectivity modules
Revenue
25.4%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
45%-55% (reported)
Peers
Batteries and Power Supply
Small rechargeable batteries and compact power supply modules for electronics
Revenue
8.9%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
weak
Share
—
Peers
Functional Devices (including sensors)
Sensors and other functional devices for electronics (consumer, automotive, industrial)
Revenue
5.6%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
weak
Share
—
Peers
Other
Other / residual businesses (reported as 'Others')
Revenue
0.9%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
none
Share
—
Peers
—
Moat Claims
Capacitors (primarily MLCC)
Multilayer ceramic capacitors (MLCC) and related capacitors
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (Capacitors 47.7% of revenue).
Capex Knowhow Scale
Supply
Capex Knowhow Scale
Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
High-end MLCC leadership is reinforced by cumulative process know-how and sustained capex to expand/reinforce capacity and supply assurance.
Erosion risks
- Industry overcapacity leading to price wars
- Fast catch-up by major rivals (process tech and capacity)
- Geopolitical and supply-chain disruptions
Leading indicators
- Capex pace vs peers
- Utilization rates and lead times
- Gross margin trend in components
Counterarguments
- Other mega-suppliers can fund comparable capex (e.g., Samsung Electro-Mechanics, TDK)
- A meaningful portion of MLCC demand is commoditized and price-elastic
Learning Curve Yield
Supply
Learning Curve Yield
Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
MLCC miniaturization and high-reliability manufacturing are yield-sensitive; accumulated process learning can be difficult to replicate quickly at scale.
Erosion risks
- Process innovations diffusing across the industry
- Materials/input constraints diminishing yield advantages
- Technology shifts reducing MLCC content per device in some categories
Leading indicators
- Product mix toward ultra-small / high-reliability MLCC
- Scrap/yield commentary and capacity ramp performance
- Relative gross margin vs peers in passive components
Counterarguments
- Yield advantages can be narrowed with sustained investment by top competitors
- End-market cyclicality can mask or exaggerate true process advantage
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Automotive MLCC qualification and reliability requirements create design-in/qualification friction that favors incumbents with established reliability records.
Erosion risks
- Automotive OEM/tier-1 multi-sourcing mandates
- Competitors qualifying into automotive programs over time
- Regulatory or quality events impacting trust
Leading indicators
- Automotive-related sales mix for MLCC
- Customer qualification wins/losses
- Field failure/recall headlines (industry-wide or Murata-specific)
Counterarguments
- Automotive OEMs actively diversify suppliers to reduce concentration risk
- Qualification is a hurdle but not an insurmountable moat for top-tier rivals
Benchmark Pricing Power
Financial
Benchmark Pricing Power
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Pricing power is strongest in high-reliability / high-spec niches; overall MLCC cycles and competition can still pressure pricing.
Erosion risks
- Commodity pricing pressure during downcycles
- Customer bargaining power (large OEMs)
- New capacity additions across industry
Leading indicators
- ASP trends and discounting intensity
- Book-to-bill and backlog
- Competitor capacity announcements
Counterarguments
- Even leaders face price pressure when industry utilization drops
- Large customers can force pricing concessions via dual-sourcing
Inductors and EMI Filters
Inductors and electromagnetic interference (EMI) suppression components
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (Inductors and EMI filters 11.5% of revenue).
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
In reliability-sensitive passives, Murata's reputation and trust with OEMs supports repeat design wins across multiple component lines.
Erosion risks
- Quality incidents damaging reputation
- OEM cost-down pressure reducing brand premium
- Competitors closing reliability gaps
Leading indicators
- Automotive/industrial mix within passives
- Customer concentration and renewals
- Warranty/quality metrics (when disclosed)
Counterarguments
- For many inductors/EMI parts, qualification is manageable and price competition dominates
- Large OEMs can multi-source to neutralize supplier reputation advantages
High-Frequency Devices and Communications Modules
RF filters and front-end components (e.g., SAW) and communications/connectivity modules
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (High-Frequency Device and Communications Module 25.4% of revenue).
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Filter performance depends on specialized IP, process, and manufacturing know-how; Murata has expanded filter technology capabilities via acquisitions (e.g., Resonant/XBAR).
Erosion risks
- Technology substitution (e.g., different filter architectures)
- Customer vertical integration or tighter co-design with competitors
- Regulatory/export restrictions affecting RF supply chains
Leading indicators
- RF design win announcements and teardown share
- Performance claims (loss, bandwidth) vs peers
- R&D cadence and patent activity (where observable)
Counterarguments
- RF content is highly contested; large semiconductor peers also have deep IP and scale
- Smartphone OEM concentration can compress supplier margins regardless of IP
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
RF modules/filters are designed into device platforms; qualification and performance tuning create switching friction, though major OEMs can still re-source over product cycles.
Erosion risks
- Loss of design wins in flagship smartphone platforms
- Standardization reducing differentiation
- OEM multi-sourcing to reduce dependence
Leading indicators
- Reported market share / design-win chatter in RF modules
- Customer concentration trends
- Smartphone unit cycles and RF content per phone
Counterarguments
- Design wins reset each generation; switching can happen on annual cycles
- Competitors can bundle more RF content (PA + filters + modules) to displace incumbents
Benchmark Pricing Power
Financial
Benchmark Pricing Power
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
High market share in certain RF filters supports bargaining power, but smartphone cycles and customer concentration limit sustained pricing leverage.
Erosion risks
- Pricing concessions to retain flagship OEM sockets
- Competitor price aggression in downturns
- Technology transition requiring re-tooling
Leading indicators
- Gross margin trend in devices/modules
- Reported share shifts in RF modules
- ASP trends in smartphones (proxy for component cost-down cycles)
Counterarguments
- Third-party analysis has flagged RF module share losses (indicating vulnerability)
- RF front-end is consolidating around integrated solutions where Murata may not always lead
Batteries and Power Supply
Small rechargeable batteries and compact power supply modules for electronics
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (Battery and Power supply 8.9% of revenue).
Compliance Advantage
Legal
Compliance Advantage
Strength: 2/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 2/5 · 1 evidence
Any moat is primarily qualification/safety/compliance-driven (battery reliability) rather than unique IP; competition remains intense.
Erosion risks
- Commoditization and cost-driven sourcing
- Rapid technology cycles in battery chemistries and packaging
- Safety incidents causing customer re-sourcing
Leading indicators
- Customer diversification in battery sales
- Recall/safety incidents (industry and Murata)
- Margin trend in the segment
Counterarguments
- Large battery makers have stronger scale advantages in many categories
- Batteries are often sourced primarily on cost, safety track record, and availability
Functional Devices (including sensors)
Sensors and other functional devices for electronics (consumer, automotive, industrial)
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (Functional Device 5.6% of revenue).
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
Design-in and qualification can create stickiness for sensors/functional devices, but the market remains competitive and Murata has indicated it wants to grow share via M&A.
Erosion risks
- Faster innovation cycles from semiconductor/sensor specialists
- Price pressure and multi-sourcing by OEMs
- Technology obsolescence and changing standards
Leading indicators
- Acquisitions and integration success in sensors
- Design-win pipeline and customer diversification
- Segment margin trajectory
Counterarguments
- Major IC/sensor players have larger R&D budgets and deeper ecosystems
- Qualification can help, but winning sockets often depends on performance-per-cost each generation
Other
Other / residual businesses (reported as 'Others')
Revenue share is based on the product-category breakdown in Murata's FY ended 2025-03-31 results (Others 0.9% of revenue).
Residual segment
Demand
Residual segment
Strength: 1/5 · Durability: fragile · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence
This is a small reported residual category ('Others') without a stable, distinct moat profile; treated as non-core for moat mapping.
Residual category; no meaningful moat assessment.
Erosion risks
- N/A (immaterial segment)
Leading indicators
- N/A (immaterial segment)
Counterarguments
- N/A (immaterial segment)
Evidence
Murata is also planning capital spending of 680 billion yen over the next three years ... in Japan and Thailand.
Large, explicit multi-year capacity capex supports a scale/capex moat thesis in core components (including MLCC).
Murata, the top MLCC maker, predicts AI server-related MLCC demand to more than double by the end of fiscal 2025.
Demand tailwinds + leadership position make scale investments more defensible and harder for smaller rivals to match.
Murata's share of the MLCC market is 40% ... 50% in the automotive market.
Company-stated market leadership (global + automotive) is consistent with a long learning curve and high-yield execution advantages.
Murata's share of the MLCC market is 40% ... 50% in the automotive market.
High stated automotive share is consistent with qualification-heavy customer requirements and incumbent advantage.
profit-decreasing factors such as a fall in product selling prices
Management explicitly cites selling price declines as a profit headwind, indicating limited pricing power in parts of the portfolio.
Showing 5 of 14 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Industry overcapacity leading to price wars
- Fast catch-up by major rivals (process tech and capacity)
- Geopolitical and supply-chain disruptions
- Process innovations diffusing across the industry
- Materials/input constraints diminishing yield advantages
- Technology shifts reducing MLCC content per device in some categories
Leading indicators
- Capex pace vs peers
- Utilization rates and lead times
- Gross margin trend in components
- Product mix toward ultra-small / high-reliability MLCC
- Scrap/yield commentary and capacity ramp performance
- Relative gross margin vs peers in passive components
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.