VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS COMPARISON ★

NO ADVICE

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

Stock Comparison

Nasdaq, Inc. vs Philip Morris International Inc.

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

Nasdaq, Inc.

NDAQ · NASDAQ

Market cap (USD)
SectorFinancials
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
Moat score
76/ 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 Nasdaq, Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View NDAQ analysis

Philip Morris International Inc.

PM · New York Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorConsumer
CountryUS
Data as of2025-12-31
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 Philip Morris International Inc.'s moat claims, evidence, and risks.

View PM analysis

Comparison highlights

  • Moat score gap: Philip Morris International Inc. leads (84 / 100 vs 76 / 100 for Nasdaq, Inc.).
  • Segment focus: Nasdaq, Inc. has 3 segments (42.4% in Capital Access Platforms); Philip Morris International Inc. has 3 segments (61.3% in Combustible Tobacco).
  • Primary market structure: Oligopoly vs Oligopoly. Pricing power: Moderate vs Strong.
  • Moat breadth: Nasdaq, Inc. has 9 moat types across 5 domains; Philip Morris International Inc. has 6 across 3.

Primary market context

Nasdaq, Inc.

Capital Access Platforms

Market

Issuer and investor solutions: listings, index licensing, market data, and investment analytics/workflow platforms

Geography

Global (with major exposure to U.S. and Nordic/Baltic markets)

Customer

Public/private companies (issuers), asset managers, institutional investors, data subscribers

Role

Listing venue + index administrator/licensor + data/analytics provider

Revenue share

42.4%

Philip Morris International Inc.

Combustible Tobacco

Market

International combustible tobacco (primarily cigarettes)

Geography

Global (primarily ex-U.S.)

Customer

Adult smokers; distributors/wholesalers and retail channels

Role

Branded manufacturer and distributor

Revenue share

61.3%

Side-by-side metrics

Nasdaq, Inc.
Philip Morris International Inc.
Ticker / Exchange
NDAQ - NASDAQ
PM - New York Stock Exchange
Market cap (USD)
n/a
n/a
Sector
Financials
Consumer
HQ country
US
US
Primary segment
Capital Access Platforms
Combustible Tobacco
Market structure
Oligopoly
Oligopoly
Market share
80%-84% (reported)
25.3% (reported)
HHI estimate
n/a
n/a
Pricing power
Moderate
Strong
Moat score
76 / 100
84 / 100
Moat domains
Legal, Network, Supply, Demand, Financial
Demand, Supply, Legal
Last update
2025-12-31
2025-12-31

Moat coverage

Shared moat types

Brand TrustCompliance Advantage

Nasdaq, Inc. strengths

Concession LicenseTwo Sided NetworkPhysical Network DensityDe Facto StandardBenchmark Pricing PowerData Workflow LockinLong Term Contracts

Philip Morris International Inc. strengths

Distribution ControlInstalled Base ConsumablesIP Choke PointRegulated Standards Pipe

Segment mix

Nasdaq, Inc. segments

Full profile >

Market Services

Competitive

21.9%

Capital Access Platforms

Oligopoly

42.4%

Financial Technology

Competitive

35.6%

Philip Morris International Inc. segments

Full profile >

Combustible Tobacco

Oligopoly

61.3%

Smoke-Free Products

Oligopoly

37.8%

Wellness & Healthcare

Competitive

0.9%

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.