VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Stock Comparison

Tencent Holdings Limited vs Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

Compare moat strength, market structure, and segment coverage to understand how each company defends its edge.

Tencent Holdings Limited

0700.HK · Hong Kong Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)$705.6B
SectorCommunication Services
CountryCN
Data as of2025-12-28
Moat score
73/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Tencent Holdings Limited's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View 0700.HK analysis

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

MMC · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorFinancials
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
65/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Full stock profile

Dive deeper into Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View MMC analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Tencent Holdings Limited leads (73 / 100 vs 65 / 100 for Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.).
  • Segment focus: Tencent Holdings Limited has 4 segments (48.3% in Value-Added Services (VAS)); Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. has 2 segments (62.8% in Risk and Insurance Services).
  • Moat breadth: Tencent Holdings Limited has 6 moat types across 2 domains; Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. has 5 across 3.

Primary market context

Tencent Holdings Limited

Value-Added Services (VAS)

Market

Consumer social platforms and digital entertainment (online games, subscriptions, virtual items, digital content)

Geography

Mainland China (core) + Global (games)

Customer

Consumers

Role

Platform/operator + content publisher

Revenue share

48.3%

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

Risk and Insurance Services

Market

Insurance brokerage, risk advisory, and reinsurance brokerage/services

Geography

Global

Customer

Enterprises, public entities, associations, and individuals (via broker/agent channels)

Role

Intermediary + advisor (insurance/reinsurance market intermediary)

Revenue share

62.8%

Side-by-side metrics

Tencent Holdings Limited
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
0700.HK - Hong Kong Stock Exchange
MMC - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
$705.6B
n/a
Sector
Communication Services
Financials
HQ country
CN
US
Primary segment
Value-Added Services (VAS)
Risk and Insurance Services
Market structure
Oligopoly
Oligopoly
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Moderate
Moat score
73 / 100
65 / 100
Moat domains
Network, Supply
Supply, Demand, Legal
Last update
2025-12-28
2025-12-31

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

No overlap yet.

Tencent Holdings Limited strengths

Direct Network EffectsEcosystem ComplementsDistribution ControlTwo Sided NetworkData Network EffectsCapex Knowhow Scale

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. strengths

Service Field NetworkBrand TrustSwitching Costs GeneralCompliance AdvantageData Workflow Lockin

Segment mix

Tencent Holdings Limited segments

Full profile >

Value-Added Services (VAS)

Oligopoly

48.3%

Marketing Services

Oligopoly

18.4%

FinTech and Business Services

Oligopoly

32.1%

Others

Competitive

1.2%

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. segments

Full profile >

Risk and Insurance Services

Oligopoly

62.8%

Consulting

Competitive

37.2%

Want the full wide moat stocks list?

Browse the full ranking of wide moat stocks, updated with moat scores and segment context.

View the moat stocks list

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.