VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Thursday, January 8, 2026

Stock Comparison

KONE Oyj vs Texas Roadhouse, Inc.

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

KONE Oyj

KNEBV · Nasdaq Helsinki

Market cap (USD)$37B
Gross margin (TTM)
Operating margin (TTM)
Net margin (TTM)
SectorIndustrials
Industry
CountryFI
Data as of2026-01-02
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 KONE Oyj's moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View KNEBV analysis

Texas Roadhouse, Inc.

TXRH · NASDAQ Global Select Market

Market cap (USD)$11.6B
Gross margin (TTM)16.7%
Operating margin (TTM)8.9%
Net margin (TTM)7.5%
SectorConsumer
IndustryRestaurants
CountryUS
Data as of2026-01-06
Moat score
66/ 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 Texas Roadhouse, Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View TXRH analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Texas Roadhouse, Inc. leads (66 / 100 vs 63 / 100 for KONE Oyj).
  • Segment focus: KONE Oyj has 3 segments (40.6% in New Building Solutions); Texas Roadhouse, Inc. has 3 segments (93.8% in Texas Roadhouse).
  • Primary market structure: Oligopoly vs Competitive. Pricing power: Weak vs Moderate.
  • Moat breadth: KONE Oyj has 8 moat types across 4 domains; Texas Roadhouse, Inc. has 4 across 3.

Primary market context

KONE Oyj

New Building Solutions

Market

Elevator, escalator and automatic building door new equipment (new installations)

Geography

Global

Customer

Property developers and general contractors

Role

OEM + project installation

Revenue share

40.6%

Texas Roadhouse, Inc.

Texas Roadhouse

Market

Casual dining steakhouse restaurants

Geography

United States (plus international via franchise)

Customer

Consumers

Role

Restaurant operator & franchisor

Revenue share

93.8%

Side-by-side metrics

KONE Oyj
Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
KNEBV - Nasdaq Helsinki
TXRH - NASDAQ Global Select Market
Market cap (USD)
$37B
$11.6B
Gross margin (TTM)
n/a
16.7%
Operating margin (TTM)
n/a
8.9%
Net margin (TTM)
n/a
7.5%
Sector
Industrials
Consumer
Industry
n/a
Restaurants
HQ country
FI
US
Primary segment
New Building Solutions
Texas Roadhouse
Market structure
Oligopoly
Competitive
Market share
n/a
n/a
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Weak
Moderate
Moat score
63 / 100
66 / 100
Moat domains
Supply, Financial, Demand, Legal
Demand, Supply, Legal
Last update
2026-01-02
2026-01-06

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Operational Excellence

KONE Oyj strengths

Capex Knowhow ScaleNegative Working CapitalInstalled Base ConsumablesSwitching Costs GeneralData Workflow LockinService Field NetworkCompliance Advantage

Texas Roadhouse, Inc. strengths

Brand TrustHabit DefaultIP Choke Point

Segment mix

KONE Oyj segments

Full profile >

New Building Solutions

Oligopoly

40.6%

Service (maintenance & repairs)

Competitive

40.6%

Modernization

Competitive

18.8%

Texas Roadhouse, Inc. segments

Full profile >

Texas Roadhouse

Competitive

93.8%

Bubba's 33

Competitive

5.6%

Other (Jaggers + retail initiatives)

Competitive

0.6%

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

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.