Data dependencies and execution prerequisites
It is recommended to use Wind wind-mcp-skill to obtain underlying data. Before execution, first check whether there is already wind-mcp-skilllocally; if not, prompt the user to install:
# GitHub
npx skills add Wind-Information-Co-Ltd/wind-skills --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y
# Gitee 镜像（国内）
npx skills add https://gitee.com/wind_info/wind-skills.git --skill wind-mcp-skill -g -y
Skill positioning
This skill is used to determine whether a company has a sustainable competitive advantage, and whether this advantage is deep enough, stable enough, and sufficiently capable of being converted into long-term returns. The output focus is not to label the company as a "good company," but to clarify where the moat comes from, whether the evidence is solid, and under what circumstances it will be weakened.
Execution process
Step 1: Clarify the moat proposition to be verified
First make the "moat" specific. Common propositions include:
- Whether the cost advantage is sufficient to suppress peers over the long term
- Whether brand, channels, or customer relationships form entry barriers
- Whether technology, patents, standards, or ecosystems create lock-in
- Whether network effects, economies of scale, or license resources are sustainable
If it is only short-term leadership rather than a structural advantage, avoid directly defining it as a moat.
Step 2: Identify the sources of advantage and their mechanisms
Break down the sources of the company's competitive advantages item by item, and explain their paths of effect:
- How exactly does it help the company acquire customers, maintain prices, improve profit margins, or stabilize share
- Whether it affects the revenue side, the cost side, or the return on capital side
- Whether this advantage is common to the industry or unique to the company
At this stage, it is necessary to convert "sounds strong" into "how it produces economic results."
Step 3: Look for verifiable evidence
Collect verifiable evidence around the competitive advantage, such as:
- Market share and changes in share
- Long-term performance such as gross margin, expense ratio, and return ratio
- Customer stickiness, repurchase rate, switching costs, or channel control
- Competitor structure and difficulty of entry within the industry
The key is not that the more evidence the better, but whether the evidence can prove that the advantage truly exists and continues to play a role.
Step 4: Assess sustainability and weakening forces
Analyze whether the moat can persist, focusing on observing:
- Risk of technological substitution and business model substitution
- Regulatory and policy changes
- Changes in the bargaining structure of upstream and downstream
- Impact from new entrants, cross-industry players, or price wars
Only an advantage that can withstand reverse scrutiny is worth being regarded as a long-term moat.
Step 5: Determine whether the advantage can be converted into shareholder returns
Even with a competitive advantage, it does not necessarily mean good investment returns. Further determine:
- Whether the advantage is reflected in higher profit margins or more stable returns
- Whether management can convert the advantage into reasonable capital allocation
- Whether the current valuation has already overly consumed this advantage
This step helps distinguish a "good company" from a "good stock."
Step 6: Give the moat rating and tracking signals
The final output should answer:
- Whether the moat is strong or weak
- Whether the evidence is solid or leans toward narrative
- What are the most important strengthening signals and weakening signals in the future
Output structure
{Stock Name} Moat Assessment ({YYYY-MM-DD})
I. Conclusion Summary
- Moat Rating: {Strong / Moderate / Weak / Not Yet Established}
- Source of Core Advantage: {One sentence}
- Biggest Weakening Risk: {One sentence}
II. Moat Proposition
{Use one paragraph to clearly state the competitive advantage proposition currently to be verified}
III. Evidence Matrix
| Advantage Type | Evidence | Current Judgment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| {Type 1} | {Evidence} | {Established / Partially Established / Insufficient} | {Explanation} |
| {Type 2} | {Evidence} | {Established / Partially Established / Insufficient} | {Explanation} |
IV. Sustainability Analysis
Factors Favoring Sustainability
- {Factor 1}
- {Factor 2}
Forces That May Weaken It
- {Risk 1}
- {Risk 2}
V. Implications for Investment
- Impact on Operating Quality: {Explanation}
- Impact on Return Rate: {Explanation}
- Impact on Valuation: {Explanation}
VI. Follow-up Tracking Signals
- Strengthening Signals: {Signal}
- Weakening Signals: {Signal}
- Questions That Need Further Verification: {Question}
Quality Requirements
- The moat must be grounded in verifiable evidence and cannot remain at the level of slogans and imagination.
- It is necessary to distinguish short-term leadership from structural advantages, and cyclical prosperity at a stage must not be treated as a barrier.
- Both enhancing factors and weakening factors must be clearly stated to prevent one-sided glorification.
- The final conclusion must explain the implications for investment returns, rather than merely evaluating whether the company is "good" or not.
- If the evidence is insufficient, it should be clearly stated that "it cannot yet be proven that the moat is established."