VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Thursday, January 1, 2026

Stock Comparison

Nabtesco Corporation vs W.W. Grainger, Inc.

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

Nabtesco Corporation

6268 · Tokyo Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryJP
Data as of2025-12-30
Moat score
91/ 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 Nabtesco Corporation's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View 6268 analysis

W.W. Grainger, Inc.

GWW · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryUS
Data as of2026-01-01
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 W.W. Grainger, Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View GWW analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Nabtesco Corporation leads (91 / 100 vs 65 / 100 for W.W. Grainger, Inc.).
  • Segment focus: Nabtesco Corporation has 4 segments (34.2% in Component Solutions Business); W.W. Grainger, Inc. has 3 segments (79.9% in High-Touch Solutions N.A.).
  • Primary market structure: Quasi-Monopoly vs Competitive. Pricing power: Strong vs Moderate.
  • Moat breadth: Nabtesco Corporation has 5 moat types across 3 domains; W.W. Grainger, Inc. has 5 across 2.

Primary market context

Nabtesco Corporation

Component Solutions Business

Market

Precision reduction gears (RV reducers) for industrial robot joints

Geography

Global

Customer

Industrial robot manufacturers (OEMs)

Role

Precision motion-control component supplier

Revenue share

34.2%

W.W. Grainger, Inc.

High-Touch Solutions N.A.

Market

MRO (maintenance, repair and operations) products distribution and value-added inventory/procurement solutions

Geography

North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico)

Customer

Mid-size and large businesses with complex purchasing operations; also government and institutions

Role

Distributor / wholesaler + onsite inventory services

Revenue share

79.9%

Side-by-side metrics

Nabtesco Corporation
W.W. Grainger, Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
6268 - Tokyo Stock Exchange
GWW - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Industrials
Industrials
HQ country
JP
US
Primary segment
Component Solutions Business
High-Touch Solutions N.A.
Market structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Competitive
Market share
55%-65% (reported)
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Strong
Moderate
Moat score
91 / 100
65 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Demand, Legal
Supply, Demand
Last update
2025-12-30
2026-01-01

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Service Field Network

Nabtesco Corporation strengths

Learning Curve YieldDesign In QualificationCompliance AdvantageBrand Trust

W.W. Grainger, Inc. strengths

Data Workflow LockinScale Economies Unit CostScope EconomiesOperational Excellence

Segment mix

Nabtesco Corporation segments

Full profile >

Component Solutions Business

Quasi-Monopoly

34.2%

Transport Solutions Business

Oligopoly

27.4%

Accessibility Solutions Business

Quasi-Monopoly

33%

Other Businesses

Quasi-Monopoly

5.4%

W.W. Grainger, Inc. segments

Full profile >

High-Touch Solutions N.A.

Competitive

79.9%

Endless Assortment

Competitive

18.3%

Other (Cromwell U.K. + captive insurance)

Competitive

1.8%

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.