CVT Ratio Control Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. the five largest filers account for 49.8% of all 4,430 records in scope, and the top ten reach 62.6%.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. 2017 was the high point at 160 filings; from 2021 to 2024, the last complete year, filings fell 69%, from 64 to 20.
- Gearing dominates the classification mix. F16H covers 86.6% of records, while hybrid control (B60W) and belt/chain hardware (F16G) mark the more contested adjacent branches.
Filing growth compares 2021 (64 records) with 2024 (20) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 4,430 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families addressing continuously variable transmission ratio control — the mechanisms and control logic that govern belt slip, pulley clamping force, torque capacity and ratio change rate in CVT and metal-pushing-belt systems. The scope spans 4,430 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from filings that combine CVT-specific terminology with control-function language such as transmission efficiency and ratio change rate.
Coverage spans six major receiving offices, led by the United States and Japan, with Europe, China, WIPO and India each contributing a meaningful share. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend line will read lower than the eventual final count.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 4,430-record set: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records classify across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend: a 2017 peak, then a multi-year pullback
Annual filings rose to a peak of 160 in 2017, then declined through the following years. Using the last complete year for comparison, filings fell from 64 in 2021 to 20 in 2024, a 69% drop over that three-year span. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in as publications catch up to filing dates, so they should not be read as a continuation of the decline.
Technology composition: gearing hardware leads, control software trails
F16H (gearing and transmissions) appears on 86.6% of the 4,430 records, confirming that most filings sit on the mechanical transmission itself rather than adjacent systems. B60W (hybrid/joint vehicle control) at 16.8% and B60K (vehicle propulsion and drive) at 10.2% point to a smaller but active layer of filings on how CVT ratio control integrates with hybrid and electric drivetrains. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares sum to more than 100% and should be read individually against the 4,430-record total, not against each other.
Shares are the percentage of the 4,430 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Continuously Variable Transmission Ratio Control with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about continuously variable transmission ratio control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art
US9689495B2 — Method and apparatus to control a continuously variable transmission
Filed by GM Global Technology Operations, this patent describes a control method that determines a commanded speed ratio trajectory from a first speed ratio change rate, then derives a ratio change coefficient and force ratio factor to set shift force and primary pulley pressure. It ties ratio-change timing directly to pulley clamping logic rather than treating them as separate control loops.Granted 2017-06-27
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7011600B2 | Continuously variable transmission | 439 |
| 2 | US6461268B1 | Continuously variable transmission device | 304 |
| 3 | US6991579B2 | Toroidal type continuously variable transmission | 278 |
| 4 | US7036620B2 | Continuously variable transmission | 277 |
| 5 | US6278915B1 | Driving force control system for automotive vehicle | 277 |
| 6 | US5651750A | Dual cavity toroidal type continuously variable transmission | 274 |
| 7 | US6071210A | Troidal-type continuously variable transmission and a ball spline for use in the same | 234 |
| 8 | US7166056B2 | Continuously variable transmission | 229 |
| 9 | US7169076B2 | Continuously variable transmission | 223 |
| 10 | US7198585B2 | Continuously variable transmission | 205 |
Citation counts accumulate over time, so older records such as these naturally lead the table; treat them as markers of influence within this corpus rather than current filing priorities.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once concentration, timing and classification are read together.
A small group holds most of the claim space
The top ten assignees account for 62.6% of all 4,430 records in scope, with the leader alone holding 674. New entrants filing on core pulley-clamping or belt-slip control logic are filing into ground already covered by a handful of established transmission makers and suppliers.
Filing volume has pulled back from its 2017 peak
Annual filings peaked at 160 in 2017 and fell from 64 in 2021 to 20 in 2024, the last year with complete publication data. That pattern is consistent with a technology whose core mechanical claims are largely staked out, pushing new activity toward adjacent control and integration layers.
Gearing hardware dominates; control-software classes are thinner
F16H covers the large majority of records, while F02D (engine control) and F16D (clutches and brakes) sit under 5% each. That gap suggests the control-logic side of ratio management, as distinct from the mechanical transmission, still has room for differentiated claims.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to continuously variable transmission ratio control, with the prior art for and against each one.
The competitive field
Filing activity concentrates among a small set of transmission specialists and their automotive parents, with a long tail of single- or low-count filers behind them.
One filer holds a clear lead
The top-ranked assignee alone accounts for 674 of the 4,430 records in scope, well ahead of fifth place at 239. That gap indicates a filer with a long-running, systematic program around CVT ratio control rather than opportunistic filing.
A steep drop-off after the top tier
Filing counts fall from 239 at fifth place to 83 at tenth, and continue tapering across the rest of the ranked 100 companies. This is a field where a handful of names set the terms of the art and most other filers hold small, defensive positions.
Parent-subsidiary filing pairs are common
The strongest co-assignee pairing in this dataset reflects a manufacturer filing jointly with its transmission subsidiary, a pattern repeated at smaller scale elsewhere in the top ranks. It signals that ratio-control IP is often built inside integrated engineering teams rather than licensed in.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Toyota Motor Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| JATCO Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Honda Motor Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| NSK Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Robert Bosch GmbH | 0 | — |
| Subaru Corporation | 0 | — |
| Aisin AW Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a mechanically saturated core and a thinner control-software layer. Two directions follow from that.
Map the control-logic white space
With F16H claim density this high, differentiated filing is more likely to succeed in the control algorithms governing ratio change rate and torque capacity than in the mechanical variator itself.
Explore with Patsnap Eureka →Track the electrified-drivetrain overlap
B60W and B60L records show CVT ratio control increasingly intersecting with hybrid and electric propulsion control, a boundary likely to see more filing activity as drivetrains electrify further.
Run a freedom-to-operate check →Common questions about CVT ratio control patents
Filing activity in this dataset is concentrated among a small group of transmission specialists and the automakers they supply, with the leading assignee holding 674 of the 4,430 records in scope. The next four largest filers bring the top-five combined share to 49.8% of all records. Below the top ten, which together hold 62.6%, filing counts drop off quickly into a long tail of smaller or single-filing entrants.
Filing volume peaked in 2017 at 160 records and has since declined, falling from 64 in 2021 to 20 in 2024, the most recent year with complete publication data. That does not mean the field is closed; it means the core mechanical claims around pulley clamping and belt slip are heavily occupied, which tends to push new filing into adjacent control and integration areas. Figures for 2025 and 2026 will rise as publication catches up, since publication typically lags filing by about 18 months.
Within this dataset, 86.6% of records classify under F16H, the core gearing and transmission class, while 16.8% also carry a B60W hybrid or joint-vehicle-control code and 10.2% carry B60K vehicle-propulsion codes. Smaller but notable overlaps appear in F16G (belts, chains and cables) and B60L (electric vehicle propulsion), reflecting how ratio control increasingly interacts with hybrid and electric drive systems. These shares add up to more than 100% because a single patent record can carry multiple classification codes.
US9689495B2, assigned to GM Global Technology Operations and granted in 2017, describes a method for controlling a CVT by computing a commanded speed ratio trajectory from a first speed ratio change rate, then deriving a ratio change coefficient and force ratio factor to set shift force and primary pulley pressure. It links ratio-change timing to pulley clamping pressure within a single control routine rather than handling them as independent subsystems. Anyone designing a CVT ratio controller that ties shift-force determination directly to a computed ratio change rate should review this claim scope closely.
The clearest gaps sit outside the heavily filed F16H mechanical core, particularly in control algorithms coordinating ratio change with electric motor torque in hybrid and electric drivetrains, and in belt-slip prediction under transient torque loads. Cycle-drive CVT applications (B62M), at 3.6% of records, and toroidal-variator-specific control software also show comparatively lower filing density than the core belt-and-pulley mechanical claims. These are areas where a new claim is less likely to run into the dense prior art that dominates the top-ranked assignees' portfolios.
Research Continuously Variable Transmission Ratio Control in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole continuously variable transmission ratio control corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.