VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Thursday, January 1, 2026

Stock Comparison

W.W. Grainger, Inc. vs Thomson Reuters Corporation

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

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

Thomson Reuters Corporation

TRI · Toronto Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryCA
Data as of2025-12-30
Moat score
84/ 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 Thomson Reuters Corporation's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View TRI analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Thomson Reuters Corporation leads (84 / 100 vs 65 / 100 for W.W. Grainger, Inc.).
  • Segment focus: W.W. Grainger, Inc. has 3 segments (79.9% in High-Touch Solutions N.A.); Thomson Reuters Corporation has 5 segments (40.1% in Legal Professionals).
  • Primary market structure: Competitive vs Duopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Strong.
  • Moat breadth: W.W. Grainger, Inc. has 5 moat types across 2 domains; Thomson Reuters Corporation has 4 across 3.

Primary market context

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%

Thomson Reuters Corporation

Legal Professionals

Market

Legal research and legal workflow software

Geography

Global

Customer

Law firms, corporate legal departments, and governments

Role

Subscription software + proprietary legal content

Revenue share

40.1%

Side-by-side metrics

W.W. Grainger, Inc.
Thomson Reuters Corporation
Ticker / Exchange
GWW - New York Stock Exchange
TRI - Toronto Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Industrials
Industrials
HQ country
US
CA
Primary segment
High-Touch Solutions N.A.
Legal Professionals
Market structure
Competitive
Duopoly
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Strong
Moat score
65 / 100
84 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Demand
Demand, Legal, Supply
Last update
2026-01-01
2025-12-30

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Data Workflow LockinScale Economies Unit Cost

W.W. Grainger, Inc. strengths

Service Field NetworkScope EconomiesOperational Excellence

Thomson Reuters Corporation strengths

Regulated Standards PipeBrand Trust

Segment mix

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%

Thomson Reuters Corporation segments

Full profile >

Legal Professionals

Duopoly

40.1%

Corporates

Oligopoly

25.3%

Tax & Accounting Professionals

Oligopoly

16%

Reuters News

Oligopoly

11.4%

Global Print

Competitive

7.1%

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.