Wave Energy Converter Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
A data-backed look at wave energy converter patents: who leads filing, how the technology composition breaks down across hydraulic and marine IPC classes, and where filing activity is heading through 2026.
Filing growth = 2021 (37 records) → 2024 (31); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 589 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What the wave energy converter patent record shows
Wave energy converter patents cluster around three IPC groups: hydraulic conversion machinery (F03B), marine vessel and platform structures (B63B), and hydraulic and waterway engineering (E02B). Together these define a field where the core invention is rarely the hull or mooring alone, but the mechanism that turns wave motion into usable hydraulic or electrical output. Filing has been active across 2015-2026, with a distinct peak in 2021 and a gradual easing since, though the most recent years remain undercounted because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
The assignee base is led by a small number of specialist wave-energy developers rather than diversified marine conglomerates, with the top ranked filer holding a clear lead over the field. Receiving-office data shows the United States as the largest single office, followed by European and PCT filings, indicating that protection strategies lean toward major markets and international routes rather than purely domestic filing.
Filing trends and technology composition
Trend and classification data drawn from the 589 records in scope, spanning 2015 through the 2026 cut-off.
Filing rose to a 2021 peak, then eased
Annual filings climbed to 37 records in 2021, the peak year in the series, before settling to 31 by 2024 — a -16% change across that three-year span. Counts for 2025 and 2026 are partial because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the apparent decline in the newest years should not be read as a slowdown in actual filing activity.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Hydraulic machinery dominates the classification mix
F03B (hydraulic machines and engines) appears on 75.0% of the 589 records, well ahead of B63B (ships and marine vessels) at 58.7% and E02B (hydraulic and waterway engineering) at 44.3%. Smaller shares in F03D (wind motors), E02D (foundations), H02K (electric generators), B63H (marine propulsion) and F03G (spring/weight motors) mark adjacent branches where wave-energy claims overlap with other mechanical disciplines rather than standing alone.
Shares are the percentage of the 589 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Wave Energy Converter Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about wave energy converter patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Wave Energy Converter (US10844830B1)
A wave energy converter situated on a seabed includes a pair of pistons, a means for producing energy within a vessel, and a water-conveyance pipe attached to the vessel. The pistons reciprocate using differential pressure to extract energy from a wave transiting on the surface of a body of water. Water receiving ports at high and low pressure points create a differential pressure to act on the pistons and push them in opposite directions. A hydraulic cylinder or a linear alternator is attached between the pair of pistons to extract the energy.Filed as a seabed-mounted, piston-pair architecture using differential water pressure rather than surface-float buoyancy — a distinct mechanical route from the floating-body converters that dominate the most-cited prior art.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GB2383978A | Platform provided with a plurality of renewable energy converter systems | 111 |
| 2 | US4034231A | Ocean tide and wave energy converter | 101 |
| 3 | US6561856B1 | Power floating production and ship propulsion supported by gyroscope and energized by seas | 92 |
| 4 | US5507943A | Water-wave energy converter systems | 83 |
| 5 | US5027000A | Method and apparatus for generating electricity using wave energy | 57 |
| 6 | US20090309366A1 | Wave energy converter | 56 |
| 7 | US5094595A | Labrador water-wave energy converter | 45 |
| 8 | US20050084333A1 | Wave energy converter | 44 |
| 9 | US7878734B2 | Heave plate with improved characteristics | 40 |
| 10 | US20050207844A1 | Oscillating water column wave energy converter incorporated into caisson breakwater | 37 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older filings; they are not a measure of 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 strategy
Four read-outs from the assignee, trend and classification data, aimed at where to file, watch or avoid.
The top of the field is tight, the tail is long
Five assignees hold 179 of the 589 records in scope, and the leader alone holds 56. Below tenth place (14 records) the ranking thins into single- and double-digit filers, meaning most of the 100 ranked companies are defending narrow, specific mechanisms rather than broad portfolios.
Peak activity has passed but the field is not shrinking on record
The 2021 peak of 37 records eased to 31 by 2024. Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, 2025-2026 counts are structurally incomplete and should not be read as evidence of a continued decline.
The conversion mechanism, not the hull, carries most of the claim density
F03B claims outnumber B63B marine-structure claims and E02B waterway-engineering claims. Filers are competing hardest over how energy is extracted and converted, less over the vessel or foundation that carries the mechanism.
Protection strategy favours major markets and PCT
The United States leads receiving offices at 98, ahead of the EPO at 79 and WIPO/PCT at 73, with Australia, Canada and New Zealand each holding meaningful counts. This spread suggests wave-energy filers are pursuing international coverage rather than concentrating on one domestic market.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to wave energy converter patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES INC | POWERS WILLIAM B | 3 |
| OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES INC | GERBER JAMES | 3 |
| OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES INC | BULL DIANA | 3 |
| Applied Research and Technology Co., Ltd. | WELLS ALAN ARTHUR | 3 |
| Durable Energy Corporation | MOORE SEAN DEREK | 3 |
| OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES INC | DRAPER MARK R | 2 |
| Ocean Harvesting Technologies Co., Ltd. | SIDENMARK MIKAEL | 1 |
| Ocean Harvesting Technologies Co., Ltd. | ANDERSSON TORBJORN | 1 |
Only 8 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest links all centred on Ocean Power Technologies and named individual inventors — a sign that collaboration in this field runs through employer-inventor relationships rather than cross-company joint ventures.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a mechanically dense core and a thinner set of adjacent branches. These are the practical next moves for an R&D or IP team acting on it.
Map the mechanism, not just the assignee
Because F03B claim density is so high relative to B63B and E02B, a freedom-to-operate check should start with the conversion mechanism itself before moving to hull or mooring structure.
Run a mechanism-level search in EurekaWatch the long tail for licensing targets
Below the top ten filers, most assignees hold only a handful of records — a plausible pool of licensing or acquisition targets for a specific mechanical sub-approach.
Screen the ranked assignee list in EurekaTreat 2025-2026 counts as provisional
Any internal trend-tracking should flag the last 18 months as incomplete rather than declining, and re-check the count on a rolling basis.
Set up trend monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on wave energy converter patents
The assignee ranking is led by a single company holding 56 of the 589 records in scope, well ahead of the rest of the field. The top 5 assignees combined account for 179 records, or 30.4% of all records, while the top 10 reach 268 records, or 45.5%. Below the tenth-ranked filer at 14 records, the ranking thins into a long tail of companies with much smaller counts, so most of the 100 ranked entities hold narrow, specific positions rather than broad portfolios.
Filing rose to a peak of 37 records in 2021, then eased to 31 records by 2024, a -16% change over that three-year span. Because patent publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 counts in any dataset will always look lower than the true filing rate for those years, so they should not be read as a slowdown. Based on the complete data through 2024, activity has cooled from its 2021 peak but remains meaningfully above early-2015 levels.
The dominant classification is F03B, hydraulic machines and engines, appearing on 75.0% of the 589 records in scope. B63B, ships and marine vessels, follows at 58.7%, and E02B, hydraulic and waterway engineering, at 44.3%. Smaller but notable shares fall in F03D (wind motors), E02D (foundations and earth drilling), H02K (electric generators), B63H (marine propulsion) and F03G (spring and weight motors) — these mark adjacent mechanical disciplines where wave-energy claims sometimes overlap rather than areas dominated by wave-specific inventions.
US10844830B1 claims a seabed-situated wave energy converter using a pair of pistons driven by differential water pressure through high- and low-pressure water receiving ports, with a hydraulic cylinder or linear alternator between the pistons extracting the energy. This is a specific mechanical architecture — piston-pair, pressure-differential, seabed-mounted — distinct from the floating-body and surface-buoy converters that dominate the most-cited prior art such as GB2383978A and US5507943A. It does not block every seabed-mounted design outright, but any new filing using a similar piston-pair, differential-pressure extraction mechanism would need to design around its specific claim elements.
The most-cited record in this dataset is GB2383978A, covering a platform fitted with multiple renewable energy converter systems, cited 111 times. Close behind are US4034231A, an ocean tide and wave energy converter cited 101 times, and US6561856B1, a gyroscope-stabilised floating power and propulsion system cited 92 times. These citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings, since newer patents have had less time to accumulate citations — they signal foundational status, not current commercial dominance.
Research Wave Energy Converter Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole wave energy converter patent landscape 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.