VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Saturday, January 3, 2026

Stock Comparison

Halma plc vs The Charles Schwab Corporation

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

Halma plc

HLMA · London Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
Gross margin (TTM)
Operating margin (TTM)
Net margin (TTM)
SectorTechnology
Industry
CountryGB
Data as of2026-01-02
Moat score
59/ 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 Halma plc's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View HLMA analysis

The Charles Schwab Corporation

SCHW · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)$183.6B
Gross margin (TTM)84.4%
Operating margin (TTM)39%
Net margin (TTM)30.3%
SectorFinancials
IndustryFinancial - Capital Markets
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-26
Moat score
74/ 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 The Charles Schwab Corporation's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View SCHW analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: The Charles Schwab Corporation leads (74 / 100 vs 59 / 100 for Halma plc).
  • Segment focus: Halma plc has 3 segments (40% in Safety); The Charles Schwab Corporation has 2 segments (79.4% in Investor Services).
  • Primary market structure: Competitive vs Oligopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Weak.
  • Moat breadth: Halma plc has 4 moat types across 2 domains; The Charles Schwab Corporation has 7 across 4.

Primary market context

Halma plc

Safety

Market

Safety technologies (fire safety, public safety, worker safety, and protection of critical assets/infrastructure)

Geography

Global

Customer

Commercial/industrial facility owners and operators; infrastructure operators; installers and OEM channels

Role

Technology OEM / component + systems supplier

Revenue share

40%

The Charles Schwab Corporation

Investor Services

Market

U.S. retail brokerage, self-directed investing, and wealth management platforms

Geography

United States

Customer

Retail investors, employers, retirement plan sponsors

Role

Broker-dealer + bank + wealth manager platform

Revenue share

79.4%

Side-by-side metrics

Halma plc
The Charles Schwab Corporation
Ticker / Exchange
HLMA - London Stock Exchange
SCHW - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
$183.6B
Gross margin (TTM)
n/a
84.4%
Operating margin (TTM)
n/a
39%
Net margin (TTM)
n/a
30.3%
Sector
Technology
Financials
Industry
n/a
Financial - Capital Markets
HQ country
GB
US
Primary segment
Safety
Investor Services
Market structure
Competitive
Oligopoly
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Weak
Moat score
59 / 100
74 / 100
Moat domains
Legal, Demand
Supply, Demand, Financial, Network
Last update
2026-01-02
2025-12-26

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

No overlap yet.

Halma plc strengths

Compliance AdvantageDesign In QualificationProcurement InertiaSwitching Costs General

The Charles Schwab Corporation strengths

Scale Economies Unit CostSuite BundlingBrand TrustFloat PrepaymentData Workflow LockinEcosystem ComplementsService Field Network

Segment mix

Halma plc segments

Full profile >

Safety

Competitive

40%

Environmental & Analysis

Competitive

35%

Healthcare

Competitive

25%

The Charles Schwab Corporation segments

Full profile >

Investor Services

Oligopoly

79.4%

Advisor Services

Oligopoly

20.6%

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.