Data Integration & ETL Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filings nearly doubled from 2021 to 2024, rising 555 to 1,064 (+92%), with 2025 marking the peak year so far at 1,190 published records.
- The top 10 assignees hold just 25.3% of the field, meaning 2,130 of 8,407 records sit with a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants behind the leader.
- G06F digital data processing touches 63.2% of records, but G06N AI-based computing already reaches 20.6%, signalling where new claim activity is landing.
Filing growth compares 2021 (555 records) with 2024 (1,064) — 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 8,407 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review covers 8,407 published records matching data integration and ETL search terms combined with metadata, validation and schema-mapping concepts, filed or published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. It spans the pipeline mechanics of moving and reshaping data as well as the metadata layer that governs how that data is described, validated and mapped between schemas. Because publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, the most recent one to two years in any trend understate true filing activity.
The assignee set ranges from established enterprise software vendors filing across cloud, database and business-process categories to narrower entities built around a single patent family or a small cluster of related filings. Reading the ranking alongside the IPC composition below shows both where claim space is already dense and where the technical routes remain lightly covered.
Filing trends and technology composition
The figures below are drawn directly from the 8,407 records in scope: annual filing counts, the IPC subclasses each record is classified under, and the jurisdictions where filings were received.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Annual filings climbed from 295 in 2017 to a documented +92% jump between 2021 (555) and 2024 (1,064), before reaching a peak of 1,190 in 2025. The 2026 figure of 281 is partial and will rise as later publications land; treat the last one to two years as incomplete rather than as a slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
G06F (electric digital data processing) covers 63.2% of the 8,407 records, confirming that most filings sit squarely in core data-processing claim territory. G06Q (business/commerce processing, 27.6%), H04L (digital transmission, 20.8%) and G06N (AI-based computing, 20.6%) show substantial overlap with core ETL claims, while G16H healthcare informatics (6.3%) and G06K data recognition (4.9%) mark smaller but distinct application branches. Because records often carry multiple classes, these shares sum to well over 100% and should be read against the 8,407-record total, not against each other.
Shares are the percentage of the 8,407 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Data Integration & ETL Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about data integration & etl patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Systems and methods of data analytics based on zero extract transform load
Filed by Samsung Electronics, this 2025 application describes converting a data request into an object storage request, detecting an embedded ETL request within it, generating an ETL command, and routing that command to a storage device holding the requested ETL function — collapsing a conventional extract-transform-load sequence into storage-side processing.Abstract condensed from the original filing.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6850252B1 | Intelligent electronic appliance system and method | 4,058 |
| 2 | US6574635B2 | Application instantiation based upon attributes and values stored in a meta data repository, including tierin… | 2,446 |
| 3 | US20030120675A1 | Application instantiation based upon attributes and values stored in a meta data repository, including tierin… | 2,373 |
| 4 | US20110258049A1 | Integrated Advertising System | 2,187 |
| 5 | US20120069131A1 | Reality alternate | 2,110 |
| 6 | US20170006135A1 | Systems, methods, and devices for an enterprise internet-of-things application development platform | 1,905 |
| 7 | US6601233B1 | Business components framework | 1,859 |
| 8 | US7100195B1 | Managing user information on an e-commerce system | 1,647 |
| 9 | US20090018996A1 | Cross-category view of a dataset using an analytic platform | 1,559 |
| 10 | US20170235848A1 | System and method for fuzzy concept mapping, voting ontology crowd sourcing, and technology prediction | 1,467 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
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 say
Three patterns stand out once filing volume, technology composition and concentration are read together.
Filing activity nearly doubled in three years
Published filings rose from 555 in 2021 to 1,064 in 2024, and 2025 reached a further peak of 1,190 records. That growth is a demand signal for ETL and metadata-management claims specifically, not a general software trend, since the search scope is narrowed to those terms.
Leadership is real but not dominant
The leading assignee holds 444 records and the top 10 combined hold 2,130, or 25.3% of all records in scope. That leaves three-quarters of the field spread across the remaining ranked companies and a long tail beyond them, which is unusually open for a mature enterprise-software category.
AI-based processing is now a core overlap, not a side branch
G06N (AI-based computing) already appears in 20.6% of records alongside the dominant G06F data-processing class at 63.2%. Filings that combine schema mapping or metadata management with AI-model claims are no longer a niche — they sit inside the mainstream of current activity.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to data integration & etl patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and what is still uncontested
The ranked assignee list mixes enterprise software incumbents with narrower filers built around a small number of related families, and recent-year momentum shows some of the largest historical filers pulling back sharply.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 444 records, well above fifth place at 166 and tenth place at 110 — a steep early drop-off followed by a much flatter curve across the rest of the ranked list.
Several long-standing filers have pulled back sharply
Recent-year momentum among some of the historically largest assignees shows year-on-year declines of 82% to 100%, with several dropping to zero or near-zero filings in the latest year. Given the 18-month publication lag, this is partly a data-timing effect rather than confirmed withdrawal.
Co-filing is limited and clustered around one filer
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest links all involve the same company filing jointly with named individual inventors — a pattern of inventor-assignee co-filing rather than cross-company collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| STRONG FORCE TX PORTFOLIO 2018 LLC | 2 | -82% |
| Strong Force IoT Portfolio 2016 LLC | 1 | -83% |
| Oracle International Corporation | 1 | -96% |
| SAP SE | 1 | -96% |
| Splunk Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| International Business Machines Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| RAPIDSOS | 0 | -100% |
| American Express Travel Related Services Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The published landscape tells you where claim density already sits. The next step is checking a specific concept or draft claim against that density directly.
Map a specific claim idea against this field
Run a candidate schema-mapping or pipeline claim through Eureka to see how closely it sits to existing families before drafting further.
Explore Patsnap EurekaTrack the pull-back among historical leaders
Several of the largest historical filers show sharp year-on-year declines; monitoring whether that continues once the 18-month publication lag clears is worth a standing watch.
Set up monitoring in Patsnap EurekaTest white-space branches before committing budget
The under-claimed sub-areas identified here are starting points, not conclusions — validate each against full claim language before allocating filing budget.
Validate in Patsnap EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The ranked list covers 100 assignees, led by a single company with 444 records, well ahead of fifth place at 166 and tenth place at 110. The top 10 combined hold 2,130 records, which is 25.3% of the 8,407 records in scope, meaning three-quarters of the field sits with companies outside that top group. The mix includes large enterprise software vendors alongside narrower filers built around a small cluster of related families, so leadership by volume does not necessarily mean leadership across every technical sub-area.
It is growing. Published filings rose from 555 in 2021 to 1,064 in 2024, a 92% increase over that three-year span, and 2025 reached a further peak of 1,190 records. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as a plateau or decline — they will revise upward as more filings publish.
G06F, covering electric digital data processing, appears in 63.2% of the 8,407 records and is the dominant class. G06Q (business and commerce data processing, 27.6%), H04L (digital information transmission, 20.8%) and G06N (AI-based computing, 20.6%) follow as substantial overlapping categories, showing that most filings blend core data-processing claims with business logic, networking or AI-model elements rather than sitting in a single narrow class.
Classes with comparatively lower record shares, such as G16H healthcare informatics (6.3%) and G06K data recognition (4.9%), indicate sub-areas that are less densely claimed than the core G06F/G06Q territory. Specific branches worth scrutiny include schema-mapping validation for streaming pipelines and storage-side zero-ETL query routing, both of which appear in the dataset but have not attracted the volume seen in general-purpose pipeline claims. Any white-space read should be confirmed against full claim text before filing, since class-level density does not capture claim scope directly.
US20250139115A1, filed by Samsung Electronics and published in 2025, describes a zero-ETL approach: it converts an incoming data request into an object storage request, detects an embedded ETL requirement within that request, generates an ETL command, and routes it to whichever storage device already holds the needed ETL function. It is relevant to anyone drafting claims around storage-side data transformation or request-routing logic, since it stakes out that specific mechanism rather than ETL processing in general. It does not block conventional pipeline-based ETL architectures that transform data before storage rather than at the storage layer.
Research Data Integration & ETL Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole data integration & etl patent landscape 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.