Ansys HFSS VS CAESAR II
As of 30 October 2026, CAESAR II is named by 131 companies and Ansys HFSS by 331; Ansys HFSS skews to companies under 200 people (46% vs 27%), CAESAR II to companies over 1,000 (39% vs 35%).
As of 30 October 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
The website-and-DNS footprint is not comparable between a marketing suite and a CRM: Ansys HFSS's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, CAESAR II rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- Ansys HFSS: 2–200 employees
- 46%
- CAESAR II: 2–200 employees
- 27%
- Ansys HFSS: 1,000+ employees
- 35%
- CAESAR II: 1,000+ employees
- 39%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 4.7 · 2.7
- Website or DNS footprint
- 0 · 0
Who chooses which
Share of each tool's companies in every segment. "Leans" marks a gap of more than two points.
| Segment | Ansys HFSS | share | CAESAR II | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 4 | 1% | 3 | 2% | even |
| 2-10 employees | 44 | 13% | 8 | 6% | Ansys HFSS |
| 11-50 employees | 42 | 13% | 12 | 9% | Ansys HFSS |
| 51-200 employees | 65 | 20% | 16 | 12% | Ansys HFSS |
| 201-500 employees | 36 | 11% | 22 | 17% | CAESAR II |
| 501-1000 employees | 23 | 7% | 19 | 15% | CAESAR II |
| 1001-5000 employees | 48 | 15% | 17 | 13% | even |
| 5001-10000 employees | 19 | 6% | 12 | 9% | CAESAR II |
| 10,001+ employees | 50 | 15% | 22 | 17% | even |
| Segment | Ansys HFSS | share | CAESAR II | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 206 | 62% | 27 | 21% | Ansys HFSS |
| Technology & software | 54 | 16% | 3 | 2% | Ansys HFSS |
| Business & finance services | 21 | 6% | 65 | 50% | CAESAR II |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 12 | 4% | 18 | 14% | CAESAR II |
| Public, community & associations | 11 | 3% | 1 | 1% | Ansys HFSS |
| Automotive | 8 | 2% | 2 | 2% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 6 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 5 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Media & content | 4 | 1% | 2 | 2% | even |
| Commerce & trade | 2 | 1% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Property & construction | 2 | 1% | 10 | 8% | CAESAR II |
| Segment | Ansys HFSS | share | CAESAR II | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 238 | 72% | 79 | 60% | Ansys HFSS |
| United Kingdom | 16 | 5% | 8 | 6% | even |
| Germany | 15 | 5% | 3 | 2% | Ansys HFSS |
| France | 10 | 3% | 9 | 7% | CAESAR II |
| India | 7 | 2% | 5 | 4% | even |
| Canada | 5 | 2% | 8 | 6% | CAESAR II |
| Netherlands | 4 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Spain | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Poland | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Singapore | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Austria | 2 | 1% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Belgium | 2 | 1% | 2 | 2% | even |
| United Arab Emirates | – | – | 4 | 3% | outside top 12 |
| Australia | – | – | 3 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| Brazil | – | – | 3 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| AZ | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | Ansys HFSS | share | CAESAR II | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engineering (non-software) | 1,766 | 90% | 460 | 93% | CAESAR II |
| Research and science | 28 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Sales | 13 | 1% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Software engineering | 12 | 1% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Customer service & success | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Design & UX | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Unclassified | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Marketing & communications | 2 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Product, program & project management | 2 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Arts media and entertainment | 1 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Data & AI | 1 | 0% | 2 | 0% | even |
| IT operations & business systems | 1 | 0% | 2 | 0% | even |
| Skilled trades and field service | – | – | 4 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Construction and civil | – | – | 3 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Quality, safety & environment | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using Ansys HFSS →
Companies using CAESAR II →
cae simulation ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
CAESAR II is named by 131 companies in job postings and Ansys HFSS by 331; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/ansys-hfss-vs-caesar-ii)
Read from the source, not self-reported
Every number on this page can be traced to a page we crawled or a posting we read. Full methodology →
- Job postingsRead hourly from career sites. A tool counts when the employer's own text names it as the team's system; both tools can count for one company.
- Website and DNSScripts and embeds on the company's pages, plus SPF, DKIM, MX and CNAME records of its domain that point at the vendor.
- SegmentsCountry, size and industry from the company profile built from its website.
- Not a reviewNo ratings, prices or feature claims. For those, read the vendors.
Ansys HFSS vs CAESAR II: questions
Which is more used, Ansys HFSS or CAESAR II?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Ansys HFSS (331) over CAESAR II (131). By website-and-DNS footprint, CAESAR II (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses Ansys HFSS?
46% of Ansys HFSS companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 27% for CAESAR II. 35% of Ansys HFSS companies have over 1,000 employees, against 39% for CAESAR II.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually Ansys HFSS in marketing and CAESAR II in sales, or during a migration.
Where do these numbers come from?
From the employer's own text in job postings read hourly from career sites, and from scripts found on company websites in our crawl. No vendor data, no surveys.
Get either list your way
The same data as a search, over MCP and the API, as bulk files, or pushed to you as it changes.
Every company on either tool,
with the person who owns it
Filter on Ansys HFSS or CAESAR II. Start free, no card.