Electrocatalyst Materials (OER/HER) Patent Landscape
Johnson Matthey and its subsidiaries collectively anchor the field, holding the top three ranked positions and signalling a commercially oriented concentration in electrode and fuel-cell catalyst IP. The field is in a Growth stage with a 31% increase in recent-window filings, with the United States and China as the two dominant filing jurisdictions.
Johnson Matthey leads a moderately concentrated field with a strong commercial tier
Johnson Matthey PLC ranks first with 34 patent families, followed closely by its spin-out Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd at 31 patent families. The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University sits third with 23 patent families, making it the leading academic filer.
The top five filers account for 25% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers. That share is moderate — indicating neither a locked-up monopoly nor a fully fragmented field — and leaves meaningful room for challengers, particularly from the academic and national-lab tier.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Johnson Matthey PLC | 34 | |
| 2 | Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd | 31 | |
| 3 | The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 23 | |
| 4 | The Governing Council of the University of Toronto | 15 | |
| 5 | The Dow Chemical Company | 13 | |
| 6 | Manufacturing Systems Limited | 12 | |
| 7 | COUNCIL OF SCI & IND RES | 12 | |
| 8 | SHAANXI UNIV OF SCI & TECH | 11 | |
| 9 | Mattiq Inc | 10 | |
| 10 | Physical Sciences Inc | 10 |
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (Italian Institute of Technology) | 10 | |
| 12 | EXXONMOBIL TECHNOLOGY & ENGINEERING CO | 9 | |
| 13 | Olin Corporation | 9 | |
| 14 | Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd | 9 | |
| 15 | Monash University | 8 | |
| 16 | Miru Smart Technologies Corp | 8 | |
| 17 | Shandong University | 8 | |
| 18 | Honda Motor Co Ltd | 7 | |
| 19 | Rice University | 7 | |
| 20 | Avium LLC | 6 |
Johnson Matthey’s dominance across three separate legal entities (PLC, Hydrogen Tech, and Fuel Cells Ltd) suggests deliberate portfolio partitioning by application segment. Entrants seeking freedom to operate should assess these overlapping positions carefully, particularly in electrode structures and catalyst materials for fuel cells and electrolysers.
The most recent 18–24 months of filings are under-counted due to patent publication lag; current-period activity is higher than the raw numbers suggest. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing volumes are in sustained growth; electrolytic production dominates the IPC mix
Two charts together show that activity has expanded materially since 2019 and that the technology class structure is heavily weighted toward applied electrolytic chemistry, with meaningful secondary clusters in fuel-cell electrode science and heterogeneous catalysis.
Annual filing trend
Annual filings rose from 20 in 2017 to a recorded peak of 85 in 2024 before the 2025 and 2026 figures drop sharply — a pattern attributable to publication lag rather than a real decline. The field’s 31% recent-window growth confirms the underlying trend remains upward. The step-change between 2018 and 2019 (24 to 45 families) marks the period when green-hydrogen and water-electrolysis activity began to accelerate meaningfully.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
C25B (Electrolytic production of compounds) dominates the IPC distribution, reflecting the direct OER/HER application focus. H01M (Batteries, cells and fuel cells) and B01J (Chemical and physical processes and catalysis) form a sizeable secondary tier, indicating that a large share of the corpus addresses catalyst integration into full electrochemical devices rather than materials synthesis alone. Nanotechnology (B82Y), metal compounds (C01G and C01B), and surface-engineering classes (C25D and C23C) are present but comparatively sparse, pointing to under-developed adjacent branches.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Method for manufacturing an electrocatalyst, elect…
The invention relates to a method for manufacturing an electrocatalyst in the form of an HER catalyst for a water electrolyzer, wherein the HER catalyst is synthesised from an aqueous solution of a molybdenum salt with the addition of an aromatic amine and an acid. The invention further relates to a method for manufacturing an electrocatalyst in the form of… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Catalyst material | 254 |
| 2 | Electrode structure for solid state electrochemica… | 140 |
| 3 | Electrode structure for solid state electrochemica… | 134 |
| 4 | Catalyst material | 130 |
| 5 | Solide oxide fuel cell stack with composite electr… | 125 |
| 6 | Modified carbon products, their use in electrocata… | 91 |
| 7 | Gold electrocatalyst, methods for preparing it, el… | 75 |
| 8 | Electrochemical cell having electrode comprising g… | 74 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D strategy
Four structural observations — maturity, concentration, collaboration, and geography — each carry distinct implications for teams deciding where to invest in electrocatalyst materials.
Growth stage: expanding market, rising competitive stakes
The lifecycle evidence places this field firmly in Growth, with annual filings still rising and a 31% increase recorded over the recent window. The 2019 inflection point aligns with the surge in green-hydrogen policy commitments globally. Teams entering now face a landscape that is active but not yet mature enough to be foreclosed; early movers from 2017–2020 hold a compounding advantage in citation influence.
Growth stageModerate concentration with a clear commercial anchor
The top five filers represent 25% of the hundred largest filers’ combined output, which is moderate. Johnson Matthey’s multi-entity presence at the top compresses that apparent share further: three of the top five ranked positions belong to Johnson Matthey group entities. Academic and national-lab filers (Stanford, University of Toronto, CSIR) form a distinct second tier, suggesting that fundamental catalyst chemistry remains open ground relative to device-integration IP.
Moderate HHIUniversity–industry co-filing is active, anchored by Toronto–TotalEnergies
The most active co-filing pair is the Governing Council of the University of Toronto and TotalEnergies, with five jointly filed patent families. Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd co-files with both the University of Montpellier II and the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), each pair producing three co-filed families. A smaller Toronto–TotalEnergies Ventures collaboration also appears. These pairings indicate that Europe-based industrial players are actively leveraging academic catalyst expertise through formal IP partnerships.
Cross-sector co-filingUS and China are near-parity filing hubs; PCT and EPO provide broad reach
The United States leads jurisdictional coverage with 179 patent records, while China follows at 173 — a near-tie that reflects both commercial market importance and domestic R&D investment in green hydrogen. WIPO PCT filings number 96, indicating that many applicants are preserving broad international optionality. India at 50 records is a notable secondary market, exceeding EPO’s 63 and pointing to growing electrolysis deployment interest in South Asia.
US–China parityGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| The Governing Council of the University of Toronto | TotalEnergies SE | 5 |
| Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd | University of Montpellier II | 3 |
| Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd | French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) | 3 |
| The Governing Council of the University of Toronto | TotalEnergies Ventures | 1 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Johnson Matthey dominates via device integration; Stanford leads in fundamental electrolysis chemistry
The leader and primary challenger differ sharply in technology emphasis and trajectory: one is a commercialising industrial group, the other an academic institution building foundational electrolysis IP with no recent deceleration signal.
Johnson Matthey PLC
Johnson Matthey PLC holds 34 patent families and anchors its portfolio in electrode and fuel-cell science (H01M 4 and H01M 8 are the top two IPC sub-classes) alongside heterogeneous catalysis (B01J 23). Its subsidiary Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd (31 patent families) emerged as a new entrant in the recent window with a trend of new entrant momentum, concentrating on a similar H01M-heavy profile but also covering C25B 11 electrolytic electrode materials. Together, the two entities constitute an integrated industrial-to-hydrogen-production IP stack. The third entity, Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd (9 patent families), extends the group’s reach into fuel-cell system integration.
patent families: 34Stanford University
Stanford holds 23 patent families and is the most active academic filer. Its portfolio is concentrated in direct water-splitting chemistry: C25B 11 (electrolytic electrode materials, 20 sub-class records) and C25B 1 (electrolytic production of hydrogen and oxygen, 18 records) are its top two classes, with a small secondary presence in membrane separation (B01D 69). This composition reflects fundamental OER/HER catalyst research rather than commercial device integration. No momentum trend data places Stanford among the recent new entrants, suggesting a steady, sustained filing cadence rather than a sudden surge.
patent families: 23| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd | 11 | ▲ new entrant |
| The Governing Council of the University of Toronto | 3 | ▼ -75% |
| Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) | 8 | ▲ new entrant |
| Manufacturing Systems Limited | 3 | ▲ new entrant |
| Shaanxi University of Science and Technology | 2 | ▲ new entrant |
| Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (Italian Institute of Technology) | 5 | ▲ new entrant |
Under-served branches at the intersection of nanomaterials and surface engineering
Five IPC branches appear at notably lower density relative to the dominant C25B core. Two stand out as potentially actionable based on their technical adjacency and sparse coverage.
B82Y · Nanotechnology applications in electrocatalysis
B82Y holds 64 patent records — only 5% of the IPC distribution — despite the well-established performance benefits of nanostructured catalysts for OER/HER (high surface area, tunable active-site density). The sparse coverage likely reflects the fact that most filers classify primarily under C25B and use B82Y as a secondary code only when nanostructure is explicitly claimed. Teams with proprietary nanostructure synthesis routes (e.g. single-atom catalysts, nano-alloy systems) may find relatively open claim space here, particularly if they can distinguish from the C25B 11 anchor claims held by Johnson Matthey and Stanford.
Search this in Eureka →C23C · Coating and surface deposition for catalyst layers
C23C (Coating and surface deposition) carries only 25 patent records — 2% of the distribution — despite the relevance of thin-film deposition techniques such as ALD, CVD, and sputtering to precise catalyst layer fabrication in electrolysers. Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia is the only top-ranked applicant with explicit C23C 14 coverage (4 records). This branch is sparse and has a realistic entry path for firms with physical-vapour-deposition or atomic-layer-deposition capabilities seeking to protect process-defined catalyst architectures distinct from wet-chemistry routes dominant in C25B 11.
Search this in Eureka →How leaders differ across electrolytic production, fuel-cell, and catalysis routes
Route coverage across the main technology branches in the current evidence set.
| Player | C25B 11 · Electrolytic production of compounds | C25B 1 · Electrolytic production of compounds | H01M 4 · Batteries, cells & fuel cells | B01J 23 · Chemical/physical processes & catalysis | H01M 8 · Batteries, cells & fuel cells |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johnson Matthey PLC | Moderate · 12 | Absent | Strong · 30 | Strong · 20 | Strong · 22 |
| Manufacturing Systems Limited | Strong · 12 | Strong · 12 | Strong · 12 | Absent | Strong · 9 |
| Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd | Moderate · 9 | Absent | Strong · 20 | Absent | Strong · 14 |
| Physical Sciences Inc | Strong · 10 | Strong · 10 | Strong · 10 | Strong · 10 | Absent |
| The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | Strong · 20 | Strong · 18 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd | Absent | Absent | Strong · 20 | Moderate · 5 | Strong · 11 |
| The Dow Chemical Company | Absent | Absent | Strong · 13 | Absent | Strong · 13 |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus comprises 467 patent families. This count covers oxygen evolution reaction (OER) and hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) electrocatalyst materials globally and spans the full filing history available in the dataset.
Johnson Matthey PLC is the largest single filer with 34 patent families. When its subsidiaries Johnson Matthey Hydrogen Technologies Ltd (31 families) and Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd (9 families) are included, the Johnson Matthey group collectively holds the top three ranked positions.
The United States leads with 179 patent records and China follows at 173, making them near-equal primary filing destinations. WIPO PCT applications number 96, the EPO 63, and India 50, indicating that serious commercial players are pursuing broad multi-jurisdictional protection rather than concentrating in a single market.
The evidence places the field in a Growth stage. Annual filings rose from 20 in 2017 to a recorded peak of 85 in 2024, with a 31% increase over the recent multi-year window. The apparent drop in 2025 and 2026 figures reflects publication lag and should not be read as a real slowdown.
Yes. The most active co-filing partnership is between the Governing Council of the University of Toronto and TotalEnergies, with five jointly filed families. Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd co-files with both the University of Montpellier II and CNRS, each producing three co-filed families. These pairings show that European industrial players are actively partnering with academic institutions to commercialise fundamental catalyst chemistry.
The sparsest adjacent branches relative to the dominant C25B electrolytic chemistry core are: B82Y (nanotechnology applications, 64 patent records, 5% of the IPC distribution), C01G (compounds of other metals, 46 records, 3%), C01B (non-metallic elements and inorganic compounds, 42 records, 3%), C25D (electroplating and electroforming, 27 records, 2%), and C23C (coating and surface deposition, 25 records, 2%). These are observations of relative sparsity; whether they represent actionable white space depends on a team’s specific technical capabilities and freedom-to-operate analysis.
Built on Patsnap Open Platform
This report’s underlying patent dataset — filings, assignees, technology clusters — is open for developers via MCP and REST API. Free to start, 10,000 credits, no credit card required.
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.