Agrochemical Nanoformulations Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
Agrochemical Nanoformulation Patents: Who Holds the Claims
79.3% of all 29 records sit with the top five assignees, leaving a long tail of single- or double-filing entrants. Filing peaked at 9 records in 2021. The 2021-to-2024 span, the last window the data treats as complete, is down 22% to 7 records — a real pullback from peak, though not evidence of a field in decline given how thin the still-filling 2025-2026 window remains.
- 1CELLACURE LLC11
- 2RGT UNIV OF CALIFORNIA5
- 3INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURE CAAS4
- 4CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIV2
- 5REGISTRAR MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIV ROHTAK1
See the full agrochemical nanoformulations analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions on agrochemical nanoformulation patents
How concentrated is the agrochemical nanoformulation patent field?
It is highly concentrated at the top: the five leading assignees together hold 79.3% of the 29 records in scope, and the top ten reach 96.6%. The ranking itself covers 13 companies, so most of the remaining organisations hold only one or two records each. For a new entrant, this means the practical question is less ‘is the field crowded’ and more ‘which of the five leaders’ claim sets does my approach actually sit next to’.
Is filing activity in agrochemical nanoformulations growing or slowing?
Filing peaked at 9 records in 2021 and had fallen to 7 by 2024, a 22% decline over that span, which is the most recent period the data treats as complete. Years after 2024 look thinner in any chart because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so those figures will keep rising as more records publish. Read the 2021-2024 dip as a real cooling from a peak, not as proof the technology is being abandoned.
Which patent classes matter most for agrochemical nanoformulation filings?
A01N, covering biocides and agrochemicals generally, appears in 89.7% of the 29 records, and A01P, covering pesticide activity, appears in 69.0%. Delivery- and processing-adjacent classes such as A23L, B01D and C05C each sit at 31.0%, while B82Y, the class specific to nanotechnology applications, covers only 20.7% of records. That gap between the agrochemical-function classes and the nanotechnology-specific class suggests most filers are claiming the pesticidal use first and treating the nano-delivery mechanism as a secondary or dependent element.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Agrochemical Nanoformulations covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.