Fold Holdings, Inc., a bitcoin financial services company, provides access to bitcoin through a suite of consumer financial products in the United States. Its financial services platform allows consumers to accumulate, save, and use bitcoin to accomplish financial goals. It offers consumers an FDIC insured checking account, a Visa prepaid debit card, bill payments, and an extensive catalog of merchant …
Full FLDDW analysis →
Competitive advantage assessment
Key strengths
Margins Stable Across CyclesOperating margin volatility is low (stability score 0.92), demonstrating pricing resilience across cycles.
Strong Liquidity BufferLiquidity position is strong (score 0.76), providing operational cushion.
Key risks
ROIC Below WACC or PeersROIC at 8.6th percentile suggests inefficient capital deployment.
Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant ranks #156 of 316
scored companies in Shell Companies by moat score — the top 49%.
The widest moat in the group is AI TRANSPORTATION ACQUISITION C (AITR)
at 97/100.
Moat scores for companies ranked near FLDDW in Shell Companies
How FLDDW scores on the Corporate Default defenses
Pricing Power
Score 48
· 20% of the moat score
Pricing power is the ability to raise prices without losing volume.
Cost Advantage
Score 46
· 15% of the moat score
A cost advantage means delivering the same product for structurally less — better purchasing, denser distribution, a more automated process.
Customer Stickiness
Score 56
· 15% of the moat score
Stickiness is what makes revenue repeat without being re-won every year.
Capital Efficiency
Score 5
· 18% of the moat score
Capital efficiency asks what the company earns on the money tied up in the business.
Resilience
Score 52
· 17% of the moat score
Resilience is the capacity to get through a bad year on its own terms — enough liquidity, enough interest cover, and enough cash generation to avoid a rescue financing or a forced sale.
Scale & Market Position
Score 26
· 15% of the moat score
Scale matters only when it converts into economics.
Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant (FLDDW) scores 36 out of 100 on the StatsAlpha Moat Map, which rates its competitive advantage as developing. It ranks #156 of 316 scored companies in Shell Companies, the top 49%. The score is a weighted composite of 6 competitive defenses, each measured against industry peers of 315 companies in Shell Companies. Its strongest defense is Customer Stickiness (56/100) and its weakest is Capital Efficiency (5/100).
How does Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant compare with other Shell Companies companies?
Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant ranks #156 of 316 scored companies in Shell Companies by moat score. The widest moat in Shell Companies is AI TRANSPORTATION ACQUISITION C (AITR) at 97/100. The companies ranked closest are FG Merger II Corp. (FGMCU) at 36 just above it and FTAC Emerald Acquisition Corp. (FLD) at 35 just below it.
How is the moat score calculated?
Each company is scored with an industry-specific template — Corporate Default in this case, chosen because the defenses that matter to a bank are not the ones that matter to a software company. Every defense combines several financial signals, and each signal is measured as a percentile against a peer group of 315 companies in Shell Companies. The defenses are then weighted to produce the overall score out of 100.
Why is Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant scored with the Corporate Default template?
Most public companies sell a product or a service at a margin, so the moat question is whether that margin survives contact with competitors. The Corporate template scores the six defenses that show up in a general operating company's financial signature: whether it can hold price, produce more cheaply than rivals, keep its customers, earn a return above its cost of capital, withstand a downturn, and turn size into economics.
Which competitive defenses are measured for Fold Holdings, Inc. Warrant?
The Corporate Default template measures 6 defenses, and FLDDW scores: Pricing Power (48), Cost Advantage (46), Customer Stickiness (56), Capital Efficiency (5), Resilience (52), Scale & Market Position (26). Each is scored independently as a percentile against peers, so a company can be strong on one and weak on another — the overall score reflects how those defenses are weighted for this industry.
We value your privacy
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience, analyze site traffic, and personalize content. By clicking 'Accept All', you consent to our use of cookies.
Read our cookie policy
Cookie Preferences
Manage your cookie preferences. Essential cookies are always enabled.