Voltage Reference Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filing has plateaued. the field peaked in 2022 at 137 records and has since declined, with 2026 figures still partial due to publication lag.
- Concentration is moderate, not extreme. the top 5 assignees hold 18.5% of all 2,752 records and the top 10 hold 27.3% — a leader exists but the rest of the field is a long tail.
- Almost every record sits in one subclass. 96.8% of records carry a G05F classification, so differentiation shows up in the secondary classes — H03F, H03K and H02M — not in G05F itself.
What this landscape covers
This review covers published patent records combining voltage reference, low dropout regulator and bandgap reference terminology with technical claim language on temperature coefficient, power supply rejection ratio, quiescent current, load transient and long-term drift, restricted to IPC classes G05F1, G05F3 and H02M3. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, giving a decade-long view of how claim activity in bandgap cores, pre-regulation and startup circuitry has moved.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend will always understate real filing activity — treat the tail of the chart as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,752-record dataset: filings by year, and where those records sit across IPC subclasses.
A decade of filing activity
Filings rose to a peak of 137 records in 2022, then eased back; the 2026 count of 6 reflects the partial year and publication lag rather than a sudden drop-off.
Where the claims sit
G05F dominates at 96.8% of records, as expected given the search scope. The more informative splits are the secondary classes: amplifier circuitry (H03F, 6.1%), pulse/logic technique (H03K, 5.5%) and power conversion (H02M, 5.2%) each mark a distinct integration path for the reference or regulator core.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,752 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Voltage References and Linear Regulators with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about voltage references and linear regulators and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaFoundational and representative filings
GB2541287A — Bandgap reference voltage source with high power supply rejection ratio
A bandgap reference voltage source comprising a band-gap core circuit, a pre-regulator circuit, a switch circuit and a start-up circuit. The start-up circuit provides an initial bias current to the operational amplifier in the bandgap core after power-on. The pre-regulator supplies a pre-regulated voltage to the bandgap core; a comparator judges the bandgap core's output state and switches between the core output VBG and a supply partial voltage as the pre-regulator's reference. The pre-regulator stage is claimed as the mechanism for raising PSRR.Filed by South China University of Technology, published 2017-02-15.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6150872A | CMOS bandgap voltage reference | 170 |
| 2 | US5352973A | Temperature compensation bandgap voltage reference and method | 169 |
| 3 | US7518886B1 | Multiphase soft switched DC/DC converter and active control technique for fuel cell ripple current elimination | 152 |
| 4 | US5767664A | Bandgap voltage reference based temperature compensation circuit | 144 |
| 5 | US6087820A | Current source | 142 |
| 6 | US5428523A | Current sharing signal coupling/decoupling circuit for power converter systems | 137 |
| 7 | US3617859A | Electrical regulator apparatus including a zero temperature coefficient voltage reference circuit | 135 |
| 8 | US8169203B1 | Low dropout regulator | 133 |
| 9 | US6677808B1 | CMOS adjustable bandgap reference with low power and low voltage performance | 124 |
| 10 | US4870327A | High frequency, electronic fluorescent lamp ballast | 120 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older filings; they signal influence on later claim drafting, not current commercial relevance.
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 data means for filing decisions
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend line and the classification split are read together.
A leader, not a monopoly
The leading assignee holds 147 records against a fifth-place count of 56 and a tenth-place count of 45 — a real gap at the top, but the top 10 combined still account for only 27.3% of the field. The remaining ~73% is spread across the other 90 ranked companies and unranked filers.
Flat-to-declining activity
Filings rose from 111 in 2017 to a peak of 137 in 2022, then declined. Recent-year momentum figures for several major assignees show zero filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with a maturing rather than expanding claim landscape.
Differentiation lives outside G05F
Nearly every record in scope carries a G05F classification by construction of the search, so it carries little discriminating power. The secondary classes — amplifiers, pulse/logic technique and power conversion — mark where a reference or regulator design integrates with the rest of a chip, and that is where claim strategies diverge.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to voltage references and linear regulators, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders come from established analog semiconductor houses and university research groups; momentum data suggests several of the largest historical filers have gone quiet in the most recent tracked year.
A single leader, well ahead of second place
The top assignee's 147 records sit well clear of the fifth-place count of 56, indicating a sustained, multi-generation filing program rather than a one-off cluster of applications.
A fragmented remainder
With the top 10 accounting for only 27.3% of all 2,752 records, the bulk of filing activity is distributed across universities, regional manufacturers and single-filing entrants rather than concentrated among a handful of firms.
Collaboration is limited and specific
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, the strongest linking a major analog semiconductor firm with an individual named inventor, and another linking two Texas Instruments-affiliated entities. Cross-company joint filing is not a major feature of this landscape.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (TSMC) | 1 | -75% |
| Texas Instruments Inc. | 0 | — |
| Analog Devices, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Motorola Inc. | 0 | — |
| University of Electronic Science and Technology of China | 0 | -100% |
| STMicroelectronics S.r.l. (Italy) | 0 | — |
| Intel Corporation | 0 | — |
| National Semiconductor Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a plateauing core with thinner activity at its edges — the next step is deciding which edge matters for a specific product roadmap.
Map claim density against your own circuit blocks
Cross-reference the secondary IPC classes (H03F, H03K, H02M) against the specific building blocks in a target design, since G05F volume alone will not distinguish a crowded sub-area from an open one.
Explore the classification breakdownWatch momentum, not just rank
Several of the largest historical filers show zero recent-year activity; a declining leader with a strong grant history still constrains freedom to operate even while filing slows.
Review assignee momentumUse Patsnap Eureka to trace citation chains
The most-cited records in this landscape date back to the 1990s cores of bandgap design; tracing forward citations from those roots clarifies which later claims are true improvements versus re-filings.
Trace citations in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The ranking is led by one assignee with 147 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 56 and tenth place at 45. The top 5 assignees combined account for 18.5% of all 2,752 records in scope, and the top 10 account for 27.3%, meaning the majority of filings sit outside the leading group. This is a field with a clear leader but no single dominant monopoly over the whole claim space.
No — filings peaked in 2022 at 137 records and have declined since, with the 2026 count of 6 reflecting both a real slowdown and the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication that always understates the most recent year. Several major historical assignees show zero filings in the latest tracked year. Treat the recent downturn as a mix of genuine plateau and reporting lag rather than a sudden exit from the field.
Relative to the core bandgap and regulator claims, secondary integration areas show thinner density: amplifier circuitry sits at 6.1% of records, pulse and logic technique at 5.5%, and power conversion at 5.2%. Load-transient response in multi-rail designs, PSRR enhancement through pre-regulation stages, and startup bias generation for low-quiescent architectures are specific pockets worth checking against a target design before assuming freedom to operate. These are not empty spaces, but they carry noticeably less claim density than the primary G05F core.
GB2541287A, filed by South China University of Technology and published in 2017, claims a bandgap reference architecture built from a core circuit, a pre-regulator, a switch circuit and a start-up circuit, where the pre-regulator stage is the specific mechanism used to raise power supply rejection ratio. It works by having a comparator judge the bandgap core's output state and switch between the core output and a supply partial voltage as the pre-regulator's own reference input. Anyone designing a similar pre-regulated bandgap topology with this switch-comparator arrangement should review its claim scope directly rather than relying on this summary.
With the top 10 assignees holding 27.3% of 2,752 records, this landscape is moderately concentrated: there is a clear leader but not the extreme concentration seen in fields dominated by two or three firms. Around 73% of records sit outside the top 10, spread across the other ranked companies, universities and single-filing entrants. That distribution suggests competitive and academic activity remains active even as overall filing volume declines.
Research Voltage References and Linear Regulators in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole voltage references and linear regulators 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.