VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Thursday, January 1, 2026

Stock Comparison

Nabtesco Corporation vs Schneider Electric SE

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

Schneider Electric SE

SU.PA · Euronext Paris

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryFR
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
72/ 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 Schneider Electric SE's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View SU.PA analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Nabtesco Corporation leads (91 / 100 vs 72 / 100 for Schneider Electric SE).
  • Segment focus: Nabtesco Corporation has 4 segments (34.2% in Component Solutions Business); Schneider Electric SE has 2 segments (81.6% in Energy Management).
  • Primary market structure: Quasi-Monopoly vs Oligopoly. Pricing power: Strong vs Moderate.
  • Moat breadth: Nabtesco Corporation has 5 moat types across 3 domains; Schneider Electric SE has 5 across 3.

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%

Schneider Electric SE

Energy Management

Market

Energy management and electrical distribution equipment, systems and services (low/medium voltage, building and data-center electrical infrastructure, secure power, grid and energy digitalization)

Geography

Global

Customer

Buildings, data centers, industrial sites, infrastructure owners/operators; channel partners (contractors, distributors, system integrators)

Role

Manufacturer + system integrator + digital/field services provider

Revenue share

81.6%

Side-by-side metrics

Nabtesco Corporation
Schneider Electric SE
Ticker / Exchange
6268 - Tokyo Stock Exchange
SU.PA - Euronext Paris
Market cap (USD)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Industrials
Industrials
HQ country
JP
FR
Primary segment
Component Solutions Business
Energy Management
Market structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Oligopoly
Market share
55%-65% (reported)
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Strong
Moderate
Moat score
91 / 100
72 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Demand, Legal
Network, Supply, Demand
Last update
2025-12-30
2025-12-31

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Service Field Network

Nabtesco Corporation strengths

Learning Curve YieldDesign In QualificationCompliance AdvantageBrand Trust

Schneider Electric SE strengths

Ecosystem ComplementsDistribution ControlInstalled Base ConsumablesData Workflow Lockin

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%

Schneider Electric SE segments

Full profile >

Energy Management

Oligopoly

81.6%

Industrial Automation

Oligopoly

18.4%

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.