VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Wednesday, January 7, 2026

Stock Comparison

Judges Scientific plc vs Novo Nordisk A/S

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

Judges Scientific plc

JDG · London Stock Exchange - AIM

Market cap (USD)
Gross margin (TTM)
Operating margin (TTM)
Net margin (TTM)
SectorTechnology
Industry
CountryGB
Data as of2026-01-06
Moat score
63/ 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 Judges Scientific plc's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View JDG analysis

Novo Nordisk A/S

NOVOB · Nasdaq Copenhagen

Market cap (USD)$232.3B
Gross margin (TTM)
Operating margin (TTM)
Net margin (TTM)
SectorHealthcare
Industry
CountryDK
Data as of2025-12-28
Moat score
85/ 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 Novo Nordisk A/S's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View NOVOB analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Novo Nordisk A/S leads (85 / 100 vs 63 / 100 for Judges Scientific plc).
  • Segment focus: Judges Scientific plc has 2 segments (51.7% in Vacuum); Novo Nordisk A/S has 3 segments (71.1% in Diabetes care).
  • Primary market structure: Competitive vs Oligopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Moderate.
  • Moat breadth: Judges Scientific plc has 3 moat types across 1 domains; Novo Nordisk A/S has 5 across 3.

Primary market context

Judges Scientific plc

Vacuum

Market

Vacuum and surface-science related instrumentation (e.g., UHV/vacuum components and systems, thin-film/surface engineering adjacent tools)

Geography

Global

Customer

Research labs and high-tech manufacturing

Role

Equipment manufacturer

Revenue share

51.7%

Novo Nordisk A/S

Diabetes care

Market

Diabetes pharmaceuticals (GLP-1 for type 2 diabetes, insulin, and related therapies)

Geography

Global

Customer

Payers/providers and patients (via wholesalers/pharmacies/hospitals)

Role

Originator pharma (R&D, regulatory, manufacturing, commercialization)

Revenue share

71.1%

Side-by-side metrics

Judges Scientific plc
Novo Nordisk A/S
Ticker / Exchange
JDG - London Stock Exchange - AIM
NOVOB - Nasdaq Copenhagen
Market cap (USD)
n/a
$232.3B
Gross margin (TTM)
n/a
n/a
Operating margin (TTM)
n/a
n/a
Net margin (TTM)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Technology
Healthcare
Industry
n/a
n/a
HQ country
GB
DK
Primary segment
Vacuum
Diabetes care
Market structure
Competitive
Oligopoly
Market share
n/a
33.7% (reported)
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Moderate
Moat score
63 / 100
85 / 100
Moat domains
Demand
Legal, Supply, Demand
Last update
2026-01-06
2025-12-28

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Brand Trust

Judges Scientific plc strengths

Switching Costs GeneralBuy-and-build acquisition engine

Novo Nordisk A/S strengths

IP Choke PointRegulated Standards PipeCapacity MoatLearning Curve Yield

Segment mix

Judges Scientific plc segments

Full profile >

Materials Sciences

Competitive

48.4%

Vacuum

Competitive

51.7%

Novo Nordisk A/S segments

Full profile >

Diabetes care

Oligopoly

71.1%

Obesity care

Duopoly

22.4%

Rare disease

Oligopoly

6.4%

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

Looking for expansion-stage stocks?

Proven models entering the expansion stage with unit economics that work.

View expansion-stage stocks

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.