Compare
The template only earns its keep if you actually put two cases next to each other.
This is the reason every teardown answers the same questions in the same order. Put a luxury house beside a console platform and the differences stop being vibes — one is refusing sales to protect a price, the other is selling below cost to collect a toll, and both are defending a moat.
Retail · NASDAQ: COST
Costco
A membership warehouse club that sells a deliberately tiny range of goods at a capped markup, pays its staff above the market, and makes most of its actual profit from the annual fee.
Technology · NASDAQ: AMZN
Amazon
Runs a near-breakeven retail operation at enormous scale, and earns essentially all of its profit from renting out the two things that operation forced it to build — computing capacity and shelf placement.
The thesis in one line
Verdict
Moat
Wide
Scale economics · Counter-positioning · Brand
Wide
Scale economics · Network effects · Process power · Switching costs
Porter's five forces
Headline figures
- Revenue
- ≈ $254.5B
- Membership fees
- ≈ $4.8B
- Markup cap
- 14%
- Hot dog and soda
- $1.50
- Net sales
- $638B
- AWS share of operating income
- ~58%
- Retail operating margin
- ~5.4%
- Third-party share of units
- ~60%
Unit economics
One Gold Star member, one year, FY2024 averages
The member's $3,300 of shopping earns Costco about as much as the $65 card does. That is the model in one line: the shopping is the reason to renew, and the renewal is the profit. It also explains why the markup cap is not generosity — a higher margin on the goods would raise this year's profit and lower next year's renewal rate, and the second number is the one Costco is actually managing.
One $50 third-party item sold through Amazon
Amazon captures roughly 38% of the sale price and carries none of the inventory risk. The seller took the risk, paid for the warehouse, and then paid again to be found in a search of Amazon's own catalogue.
What would change her mind
1 mechanism in common