Wind Turbine Blade Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
Wind turbine blade manufacturing patents: mapping the leaders, the filing curve and the open claim space
Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees hold 37.1% of all 717 records in scope, and the leading ten hold 59.6% – but a long tail of 81 further ranked companies still files around them. Annual filings climbed from 17 in 2017 to a peak of 104 in 2021, then declined to 34 by 2024 – a 67% fall over that three-year span. Treat 2025 and 2026 as incomplete rather than as evidence of a further slowdown, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
- 1VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS AS81
- 2SIEMENS GAMESA RENEWABLE ENERGY AS64
- 3GURIT TOOLING (TAICANG) CO LTD43
- 4VITRULAN COMPOSITES OY39
- 5COVESTRO DEUTSCHLAND AG39
See the full wind turbine blade manufacturing 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
Who holds the most wind turbine blade manufacturing patents?
One assignee leads the ranked list with 81 records, well ahead of the fifth-placed company at 39. The top five assignees combined hold 37.1% of the 717 records in this dataset, and the top ten hold 59.6%. Beyond that, the ranking runs to 91 companies with a long tail of firms holding only a handful of filings each, so the field is concentrated at the top but far from a monopoly.
Is patent filing for wind blade manufacturing growing or slowing down?
Filing peaked at 104 records in 2021 and had fallen to 34 by 2024, a 67% decline over that three-year span. That is a genuine pullback in complete-year data, but the two most recent years should not be read as continuing the same trend, since patent publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months and those years are still filling in.
What manufacturing processes do most of these patents actually claim?
The IPC composition shows 62.9% of the 717 records classified under B29C, shaping of plastics, ahead of 48.1% under F03D, wind turbine hardware. This means most claim activity targets how the composite shell is formed, infused and cured rather than blade aerodynamic shape or turbine assembly. Narrower classes covering laminates, plastics preparation and polymer compositions each account for a smaller but still meaningful share of the same records.
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 Wind Turbine Blade Manufacturing 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.