I develop a model to compare the effects of moral hazard and imperfect competition in intermediary asset pricing, motivated by empirical evidence from rich trade-level data in Canadian stock markets. Intermediaries invest in multiple risky assets on behalf of their clients, choosing how much effort to exert and competing in a cen- tralized market to acquire assets. I show that the two frictions distort prices and allocations through distinct channels: moral hazard primarily affects incentive contracts, while imperfect competition influences trading behavior and pricing. I characterize how many intermediaries are needed for imperfect competition to result in smaller welfare losses than moral hazard, and demonstrate that this threshold depends on the severity of incentive problems. The results underscore that improving market efficiency requires jointly addressing market power and incentive provision in intermediary relationships.