Graph Storage & Query Engine Patents: Who Leads, Where Gaps Are 2026
Graph database and query engine patents: filing trends and who holds the ground
Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees hold 57.0% of all 640 records in scope, and the top ten hold 75.0% — this is a field with an established core, not a wide-open race. Filings rose to a peak of 147 in 2019, then eased. Comparing 2021 (43) to 2024 (31) — the last year publication lag allows us to treat as complete — gives a 28% fall. Years from 2025 onward will keep filling in as publications catch up, so treat the most recent bars as a floor, not a ceiling.
- 1STRONG FORCE TX PORTFOLIO 2018 LLC128
- 2STRONG FORCE VCN PORTFOLIO 2019 LLC84
- 3ORACLE INT CORP66
- 4MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC46
- 5INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION41
See the full graph storage and query engines 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 about graph database and query engine patents
Who holds the most patents in graph database and query engine technology?
One assignee leads clearly with 128 records in this dataset, more than three times the count held by the fifth-ranked filer at 41. The top five assignees combined hold 57.0% of all 640 records in scope, and the top ten hold 75.0%. That means the field’s core storage and indexing techniques are concentrated among a small number of large technology and infrastructure vendors, with a long tail of smaller filers behind them.
Is patent filing in graph database technology increasing or slowing down?
Filing activity peaked in 2019 at 147 records and has cooled since. Comparing 2021 (43 records) to 2024 (31 records) — the most recent year that can be treated as complete given typical publication lag — shows a 28% decline. Filings from 2025 onward will keep rising as publications catch up, so it is too early to read the very latest years as a continued drop rather than a reporting gap.
What technology areas overlap most with graph database patents?
The core classification is G06F (electric digital data processing), covering 78.0% of the 640 records in scope. Beyond that core, G06Q (business and admin data processing) appears in 32.8% of records and G06N (AI-model computing) in 26.4%, showing that a large share of graph database filings are drafted with business-analytics or AI-model use cases in mind rather than storage alone. H04L (digital transmission) touches 22.2% of records, reflecting distributed and networked graph engine designs.
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 Graph Storage and Query Engines 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.