Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/hair-repair-and-bond-building-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Hair CareHair Repair and Bond Building Patents: Who Leads and Where the Filing Has Gone Quiet
- A single filer dominates the ranking. the leading assignee holds 557 records against 111 at fifth place and 32 at tenth, a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.
- Filing has cooled from its 2017 peak. 107 records that year against 85 in 2021 and 34 in 2024, a -60% move over that three-year span (2025-26 figures are still filling in under publication lag).
- Cosmetic and biotech claims overlap heavily. A61K medicinal preparations covers 59.1% of the 1,406 records in scope and C12N genetic-engineering claims cover 41.7%, alongside A61Q cosmetics use at 42.7% — three large, overlapping claim zones rather than one clean category.
1,406
Published Records
-60%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
100
Active Filers Ranked
Filing growth compares 2021 (85 records) with 2024 (34) — 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.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This review covers 1,406 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine hair-repair or bond-building treatment claims with mechanisms such as disulfide bond chemistry, tensile recovery, cuticle smoothing, protein loss reduction, treatment durability or claim-support testing. The scope spans both formulation-side cosmetic filings and the genetic-engineering and protein-science filings that underpin some of the underlying repair chemistry, which is why medicinal preparations and microorganism/genetic-engineering classes both appear at high volume alongside straightforward cosmetics-use claims.
Filings peaked in 2017 and have since declined through the last complete year in this dataset, 2024. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 counts shown in the trend are still incomplete and should not be read as a continued fall.
Filing activity, 2017-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,406-record set: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
From a 2017 peak to a cooling filing pace
Annual filings ran from 107 records in 2017 down to 5 in the most recent (partial) year. The reliable comparison is 2021 to 2024: 85 records down to 34, a -60% change over three years. Treat 2025 and 2026 as undercounted rather than as evidence the field has stopped.
Cosmetic and biotech claims sit on top of each other
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears in 59.1% of the 1,406 records, A61Q (cosmetics use) in 42.7%, and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 41.7%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these figures overlap rather than sum to 100%; smaller subclasses such as C07K (peptides and proteins, 6.7%) and A45D (hairdressing equipment, 5.3%) mark narrower, more specific claim territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,406 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Hair Repair and Bond Building with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about hair repair and bond building and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative and most-cited filings
Representative Filing
Hair treatment compositions and hair after-treatment compositions for protection against damage by chemical treatment and for the repair of already damaged hair comprising as active substances alkylguanidine compounds (US20040258652A1)
GOLDSCHMIDT GMBH
Hair treatment compositions and hair after-treatment compositions are provided for the prevention of damage by chemical treatment compositions and for the repair of already damaged hair, wherein, as active substances, at least one of the compounds of the general formulae (I) and/or (II) are additionally used.Filed by Goldschmidt GmbH, published 2004-12-23 — predates the bulk of this dataset and illustrates how early alkylguanidine-based repair chemistry was claimed before disulfide-bond and tensile-recovery language became standard.
Most-cited records in this dataset
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2014093622A2 | Delivery, engineering and optimization of systems, methods and compositions for sequence manipulation and the… | 1,491 |
| 2 | US20140179770A1 | Delivery, engineering and optimization of systems, methods and compositions for sequence manipulation and the… | 981 |
| 3 | US20160208243A1 | Novel crispr enzymes and systems | 863 |
| 4 | US9790490B2 | CRISPR enzymes and systems | 756 |
| 5 | US20140242699A1 | Delivery, engineering and optimization of systems, methods and compositions for sequence manipulation and the… | 727 |
| 6 | WO2014204728A1 | Delivery, engineering and optimization of systems, methods and compositions for targeting and modeling diseas… | 602 |
| 7 | WO2014204729A1 | Delivery, use and therapeutic applications of the crispr-CAS systems and compositions for targeting disorders… | 555 |
| 8 | WO2015089419A2 | Delivery, use and therapeutic applications of the crispr-CAS systems and compositions for targeting disorders… | 517 |
| 9 | US6992172B1 | Recombinant gelatins | 424 |
| 10 | WO2015089462A1 | Delivery, use and therapeutic applications of the crispr-CAS systems and compositions for genome editing | 352 |
Citation counts favour older filings in any searched corpus; read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the data tells a filing strategy
Three observations shape where new filings are likely to clear prior art and where they will collide with dense, established claim territory.
Concentration
557 vs 111 vs 32
leader / 5th / 10th place
One filer, then a steep drop
The leading assignee's record count is roughly five times the fifth-placed filer's and over seventeen times the tenth-placed filer's. That gap is a cliff, not a gradient — the ranked leaders below the top spot are comparatively close to each other.
From the 100-company assignee ranking
Momentum
-60%
2021 → 2024 filings
Volume down from its 2017 high
Filings dropped from 85 in 2021 to 34 in 2024. Several of the largest historical filers show -90% to -100% year-on-year moves in the latest recorded year, though that latest year is still incomplete under publication lag.
2021-2024 is the reliable comparison window
Composition
59.1% / 42.7% / 41.7%
share of 1,406 records
Three overlapping claim zones
Medicinal-preparation, cosmetics-use and genetic-engineering classes each cover well over a third of records, meaning most filings sit at an intersection rather than in one clean bucket. Narrower classes like peptides/proteins (6.7%) and hairdressing equipment (5.3%) are comparatively open.
IPC subclass shares, 1,406-record base
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to hair repair and bond building, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing concentrates among a small research cluster
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Broad Institute, Inc. | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 550 |
| Broad Institute, Inc. | President and Fellows of Harvard College | 205 |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | President and Fellows of Harvard College | 204 |
| Unilever N.V. | Unilever PLC | 54 |
| Broad Institute, Inc. | ZHANG FENG | 42 |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | ZHANG FENG | 42 |
| Unilever N.V. | Hindustan Unilever Limited | 23 |
| Unilever PLC | Hindustan Unilever Limited | 23 |
The strongest co-assignee pairings in this dataset link the same handful of research institutions repeatedly (550 and 205+ shared records between top pairs), rather than spreading across many bilateral partnerships — a sign that the deepest genetic-engineering IP here sits inside one collaborating cluster.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who holds the ground, and where it thins out
The ranking runs 100 companies deep and is heavily front-loaded: research institutions dominate the top of the table on record count, while formulation and consumer-brand filers sit further down with smaller, steadier portfolios.
Leader
557 records
top of the 100-company ranking
A research-institution cluster leads by volume
The top of the ranking is held by academic and research-institute filers whose portfolios span genetic-engineering methods applicable well beyond hair care, which is part of why C12N appears so heavily in the IPC mix.
Assignee ranking, 1,406-record base
Consumer brands
Mid-table presence
formulation-side filers
Cosmetics majors file steadily, not aggressively
Established personal-care companies appear through the ranking with formulation and bond-repair treatment claims, but none approach the record counts of the leading research-institution filers.
Cross-referenced against A61Q and A45D classes
Momentum
-90% to -100% YoY
latest recorded year, largest filers
Even the largest filers have slowed on paper
Several of the historically largest assignees show sharp year-on-year drops in the latest recorded year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this reads as incomplete data rather than a confirmed stop in filing.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Broad Institute, Inc. | 2 | -90% |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 2 | -90% |
| President and Fellows of Harvard College | 0 | -100% |
| L'Oréal SA | 0 | -100% |
| Unilever N.V. | 0 | — |
| Olaplex, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Unilever PLC | 0 | — |
| Hindustan Unilever Limited | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this
The dataset points to next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio benchmarking or spotting where to file.
Map claims against the leading portfolios
With one filer holding 557 of the ranked records, a freedom-to-operate check should start there before looking at the long tail.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaStress-test an under-claimed branch
Peptide-based repair and cuticle-smoothing equipment claims sit at single-digit shares of the record base — worth a closer prior-art pull before drafting.
Run a white-space search in EurekaTrack the 2025-2026 filings as they land
Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, the real 2025 picture will only become visible over the next year or so.
Set up filing alerts in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
The assignee ranking in this dataset is led by a research institution with 557 records, well ahead of the fifth-placed filer at 111 and the tenth at 32. That gap is unusually steep, which suggests the leader's portfolio covers broad underlying genetic-engineering or protein methods rather than narrow cosmetic formulations. Consumer-facing hair-care brands appear further down the ranking with smaller, more formulation-specific portfolios. Anyone doing freedom-to-operate work in this space should check the leader's claims first, since its volume alone makes overlap likely.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 107 records and the reliable year-on-year comparison, 2021 to 2024, shows a -60% decline from 85 to 34. However, publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the very low counts shown for 2025 and 2026 in this dataset are undercounted rather than a confirmed drop-off. The honest read is that filing has cooled from its 2017 high through 2024, with the most recent two years still an open question.
Medicinal preparations (IPC class A61K) appear in 59.1% of the 1,406 records in scope, cosmetics-use claims (A61Q) in 42.7%, and microorganism/genetic-engineering claims (C12N) in 41.7%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC codes, these figures overlap substantially rather than summing to 100%. This overlap reflects a field where formulation science and underlying biotech methods are frequently claimed together in the same filing family.
US20040258652A1, assigned to Goldschmidt GmbH and published in December 2004, claims hair treatment and after-treatment compositions built around alkylguanidine compounds, aimed at both preventing chemical damage and repairing already-damaged hair. It predates most of the disulfide-bond and tensile-recovery language that later filings in this dataset use, making it a useful marker for how early repair-chemistry claims were framed before that vocabulary became standard. It is a representative filing in this landscape rather than the most-cited one, so its practical blocking effect depends on how closely a new formulation's active-substance chemistry maps onto its alkylguanidine claims.
The narrower IPC classes in this dataset point to comparatively open territory: peptide and protein-based repair claims (C07K) sit at 6.7% of the 1,406 records, hairdressing and toilet-equipment claims (A45D) at 5.3%, and enzyme or DNA-based testing methods for claim support (C12Q) at 3.1%. These shares are far below the dominant A61K, A61Q and C12N classes, meaning less claim density for a given search scope. That does not guarantee an easy grant, but it does mean less prior art to design around in a first search pass.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hair Repair and Bond Building covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Hair Repair and Bond Building in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole hair repair and bond building 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.