https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/peer-to-peer-and-local-energy-markets-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Virtual Power Plants
Peer-to-Peer and Local Energy Market Patents: Who Files, and What They Claim
  • Filing peaked in 2020 at 20 records and growth from 2021 to 2024 fell 36%, the last span the data treats as complete.
  • The top 5 assignees hold 34.5% of all 87 records in scope while the top 10 combined reach 57.5%, leaving a long tail of single- and double-filing entrants.
  • G06Q business-process claims sit on 86.2% of records far outpacing H02J grid-systems claims at 40.2%, which points to where the crowding actually is.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
87
Published Records
34%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-36%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
IN
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (11 records) with 2024 (7) — 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 87 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

This dataset tracks patent filings at the intersection of local energy markets, energy trading platforms and energy communities, filtered further to records that also address market clearing, network constraint handling, settlement granularity, prosumer participation, distributed ledgers or smart contracts. The scope is deliberately narrow: it captures the mechanics of how peer-to-peer energy trades are matched, settled and recorded, not general smart-grid or renewables patenting.

87 published records sit in scope, spanning filings from 2015 through the 2026 cut-off. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate actual filing activity and should be read as provisional rather than a real slowdown.

Filing activity and technology mix, 2015-2026
  1. 1HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC10
  2. 2CIRCLESX LLC6
  3. 3AMPERE POWER ENERGY SL5
  4. 4WATERWAIS INC5
  5. 5AL AIN UNIV4
  6. 6ZAYED UNIV4
  7. 7XI AN JIAOTONG UNIV4
  8. 8THE SOLAR GENERATION CO LLC4
  9. 9RESILIENCE FINANCING INC4
  10. 10JIO PLATFORMS LTD4
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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
The Numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 87 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.

A 2020 peak, then a cooling filing pace

Filings rose from 2 in 2017 to a peak of 20 in 2020, then eased; the 2021-to-2024 span, the last treated as complete, shows an 11-to-7 decline, a 36% drop. Later years are still filling in under the publication lag and should not be read as a continued fall.

A 2020 peak, then a cooling filing pace0510152022017201820192020202021202220232024202542026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Business-process claims dominate over grid hardware

G06Q (business, commerce & admin data processing) appears on 86.2% of the 87 records, well ahead of H02J (power supply & grid systems) at 40.2% and H04L (digital transmission) at 35.6%. G06N (AI-based computing) reaches only 10.3%, and B60L (EV propulsion) just 3.4%, marking the thinner branches of the field.

Business-process claims dominate over grid hardwareG06Q · Business, commerce & admin dat…7586.2%H02J · Power supply & grid systems3540.2%H04L · Digital information transmissi…3135.6%G06F · Electric digital data processi…1820.7%G06N · Computing based on AI models910.3%G01C · Distance, navigation & gyrosco…44.6%G05B · Control & regulating systems44.6%B60L · Electric vehicle propulsion33.4%Other2427.6%

Shares are the percentage of the 87 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 Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about peer to peer and local energy markets and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

Representative filing and most-cited records

Representative Filing
US20230123959A12023-04-20

Systems and methods for an energy monitoring and transfer

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.

Methods and systems for facilitating the trading of energy in a peer-to-peer manner and maintaining a balanced supply. The system pairs an electric meter with an energy trading platform that establishes a blockchain distributed ledger to record transactions between consumers and suppliers, matching supply notifications against consumer requests and executing the resulting transaction.Filed by Honeywell International; published 2023-04-20 as US20230123959A1.

US20230123959A1 — patent drawing 1US20230123959A1 — patent drawing 2
View full record
Most-cited records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US20210224903A1Vertical global energy online trading platform101
2US20200410590A1Business Method, Apparatus and System for Managing Data, Analytics and Associated Financial Transactions for …76
3WO2017199053A1Method of matching renewable energy production to end-user consumption via blockchain systems50
4US20210042835A1Toll and Congestion Community Objects with Price-Time Priority Queues for Transformed Toll and Congestion Cap…44
5US20210041258A1Curb Community Objects with Price-Time Priority Queues for Transformed Curb Capacity Units42
6CN108564471A基于区块链技术的能源互联网安全智能交易系统及其方法25
7US20220247188A1Dynamic non-linear optimization of a battery energy storage system24
8US20220004307A1Virtual Power Plant Optimization Method and System20
9US20210304307A1Distributed energy transaction matching method based on energy network constraints and multiple knapsack model17
10CA3141299A1Financial transaction analytics and data management14

Citation counts inside this corpus skew toward older filings and should be read as a signal of influence at filing time, not of current commercial relevance.

Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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
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 →
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 numbers imply

Three read-throughs from the filing trend, the class mix and the citation table.

Concentration
34.5% / 57.5%
top 5 / top 10 share of 87 records

Leadership is moderate, not locked in

The top 5 assignees account for 34.5% of all 87 records, and the top 10 reach 57.5%. That leaves close to half the field held by a long tail of smaller or single-filing entrants, so no single company has closed off the space.

Based on the 87-record assignee ranking
Claim mix
86.2% vs 40.2%
G06Q vs H02J share of records

The contest is over trading logic, not grid hardware

G06Q business-process claims cover 86.2% of records, nearly double the 40.2% carrying H02J grid-systems claims. Most of the crowded prior art is about how trades clear and settle, not about the electrical infrastructure itself.

IPC subclass shares, 87-record base
Momentum
-36%
2021-to-2024 filing change

A cooling pace after the 2020 peak

Filings peaked at 20 in 2020 and the 2021-to-2024 span, the last complete window, shows an 11-to-7 decline. Whether that continues is unclear, since 2025-2026 figures are still being filled in by the publication lag.

2021-2024 filing counts
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 peer to peer and local energy markets, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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
Who's Filing

The assignee landscape

80 companies and individuals appear in the ranking behind these 87 records. Filing is led by a small group but far from consolidated, with a wide spread of smaller and academic filers behind them.

Leader
10 records
records from the top-ranked assignee

A single leader, then a shallow drop-off

The top-ranked assignee holds 10 records, more than double the fifth and tenth-place filers, who each hold 4. That gap suggests one filer built an early position while the rest of the field entered more cautiously.

Ranked assignee data, 87-record base
Long tail
80 ranked entities
assignees in the full ranking

A wide base of smaller filers

Beyond the leading group, the ranking runs to 80 companies, universities and individual filers, most holding only one or two records. This is a field still being staked out rather than owned by an incumbent set.

Full assignee ranking, not a top-100 or top-50 cut
Co-filing
10 pairs
co-assignee pairs identified

Individual-linked filings cluster around one company

Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data, with the strongest links all tying one company to named individual co-filers at 5 shared records each. That pattern points to inventor-led filings routed through a single corporate vehicle rather than joint ventures between firms.

Co-assignee pair counts
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a freedom-to-operate check
Thinner IPC branches suggest room to file without walking into dense prior art.
Network-constraint-aware clearing logicSettlement-granularity smart contractsAI-driven prosumer bidding modelsEV-integrated local trading (B60L overlap)Navigation/location-based constraint mapping
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Honeywell International Inc.0—
RESILIENCE FINANCING INC0—
SIMPSX TECHNOLOGIES LLC0—
REGMI PUSKER0—
MURTHY SUDHIR0—
MEDINA DANIEL0—
IYENGAR KIERAN0—
CLARKE JAMES0—
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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 specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, competitive tracking, or claim drafting.

Check the thinner IPC branches before drafting

G06N and B60L overlaps sit well below the G06Q and H02J crowding, which is where a narrowly drawn claim is more likely to clear prior art cleanly.

Explore white space in Eureka

Watch the long tail, not just the leader

With 80 ranked assignees and no single filer holding more than 10 records, new entrants and university filers are worth monitoring for early signals of where the field moves next.

Track assignees in Eureka

Re-run the trend once 2025-2026 fill in

The apparent cooling after 2020 is only confirmed through 2024; revisit the filing curve once later years clear the publication lag.

Set up a filing alert in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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 on this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets 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 Peer to Peer and Local Energy Markets in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole peer to peer and local energy markets corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.