VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Thursday, January 8, 2026

Stock Comparison

Judges Scientific plc vs Thomson Reuters Corporation

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

Thomson Reuters Corporation

TRI · Toronto Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)$80.2B
Gross margin (TTM)88.6%
Operating margin (TTM)33.9%
Net margin (TTM)23.8%
SectorIndustrials
IndustrySpecialty Business Services
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 63 / 100 for Judges Scientific plc).
  • Segment focus: Judges Scientific plc has 2 segments (51.7% in Vacuum); Thomson Reuters Corporation has 5 segments (40.1% in Legal Professionals).
  • Primary market structure: Competitive vs Duopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Strong.
  • Moat breadth: Judges Scientific plc has 3 moat types across 1 domains; Thomson Reuters Corporation has 4 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%

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

Judges Scientific plc
Thomson Reuters Corporation
Ticker / Exchange
JDG - London Stock Exchange - AIM
TRI - Toronto Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
$80.2B
Gross margin (TTM)
n/a
88.6%
Operating margin (TTM)
n/a
33.9%
Net margin (TTM)
n/a
23.8%
Sector
Technology
Industrials
Industry
n/a
Specialty Business Services
HQ country
GB
CA
Primary segment
Vacuum
Legal Professionals
Market structure
Competitive
Duopoly
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Strong
Moat score
63 / 100
84 / 100
Moat domains
Demand
Demand, Legal, Supply
Last update
2026-01-06
2025-12-30

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Brand Trust

Judges Scientific plc strengths

Switching Costs GeneralBuy-and-build acquisition engine

Thomson Reuters Corporation strengths

Data Workflow LockinRegulated Standards PipeScale Economies Unit Cost

Segment mix

Judges Scientific plc segments

Full profile >

Materials Sciences

Competitive

48.4%

Vacuum

Competitive

51.7%

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

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.