CANopen VS I2C
As of 30 October 2026, I2C is named by 1,146 companies and CANopen by 135; CANopen skews to companies under 200 people (44% vs 53%), I2C to companies over 1,000 (24% vs 31%).
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: CANopen's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, I2C rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- CANopen: 2–200 employees
- 44%
- I2C: 2–200 employees
- 53%
- CANopen: 1,000+ employees
- 31%
- I2C: 1,000+ employees
- 24%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 1.9 · 3.6
- 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 | CANopen | share | I2C | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2-10 employees | 13 | 10% | 120 | 10% | even |
| 11-50 employees | 17 | 13% | 210 | 18% | I2C |
| 51-200 employees | 29 | 21% | 277 | 24% | I2C |
| 201-500 employees | 23 | 17% | 167 | 15% | CANopen |
| 501-1000 employees | 11 | 8% | 81 | 7% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 14 | 10% | 129 | 11% | even |
| 5001-10000 employees | 8 | 6% | 43 | 4% | CANopen |
| 10,001+ employees | 20 | 15% | 108 | 9% | CANopen |
| Self-employed | – | – | 11 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | CANopen | share | I2C | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 84 | 62% | 570 | 50% | CANopen |
| Technology & software | 15 | 11% | 265 | 23% | I2C |
| Business & finance services | 8 | 6% | 110 | 10% | I2C |
| Automotive | 7 | 5% | 39 | 3% | even |
| Property & construction | 6 | 4% | 15 | 1% | CANopen |
| Commerce & trade | 3 | 2% | 38 | 3% | even |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 3 | 2% | 28 | 2% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 2 | 1% | 22 | 2% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 2 | 1% | 18 | 2% | even |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 2 | 1% | 13 | 1% | even |
| Agriculture & forestry | 1 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Health care | 1 | 1% | 9 | 1% | even |
| Media & content | – | – | 14 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | CANopen | share | I2C | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 54 | 40% | 700 | 61% | I2C |
| Germany | 19 | 14% | 70 | 6% | CANopen |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 5% | 63 | 5% | even |
| France | 6 | 4% | 33 | 3% | even |
| Netherlands | 6 | 4% | 18 | 2% | CANopen |
| Sweden | 6 | 4% | 16 | 1% | CANopen |
| Switzerland | 4 | 3% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Spain | 4 | 3% | 13 | 1% | even |
| Austria | 3 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Poland | 3 | 2% | 12 | 1% | even |
| TH | 3 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Canada | 2 | 1% | 30 | 3% | even |
| India | – | – | 36 | 3% | outside top 12 |
| Italy | – | – | 15 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Australia | – | – | 11 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | CANopen | share | I2C | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engineering (non-software) | 136 | 40% | 2,315 | 40% | even |
| Software engineering | 132 | 39% | 2,655 | 46% | I2C |
| Sales | 8 | 2% | 48 | 1% | even |
| Customer service & success | 5 | 1% | 6 | 0% | even |
| IT operations & business systems | 3 | 1% | 112 | 2% | even |
| Logistics warehouse and transport | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Skilled trades and field service | 3 | 1% | 13 | 0% | even |
| Data & AI | 1 | 0% | 17 | 0% | even |
| Product, program & project management | 1 | 0% | 11 | 0% | even |
| Quality, safety & environment | – | – | 34 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Design & UX | – | – | 15 | 0% | outside top 12 |
| Finance & accounting | – | – | 10 | 0% | outside top 12 |
| Unclassified | – | – | 4 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using CANopen →
Companies using I2C →
iot platforms protocols ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
I2C is named by 1,146 companies in job postings and CANopen by 135; 40 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/canopen-vs-i2c)
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.
CANopen vs I2C: questions
Which is more used, CANopen or I2C?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, I2C (1,146) over CANopen (135). By website-and-DNS footprint, I2C (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses CANopen?
44% of CANopen companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 53% for I2C. 31% of CANopen companies have over 1,000 employees, against 24% for I2C.
Do companies run both?
40 companies name both in their postings, usually CANopen in marketing and I2C 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 CANopen or I2C. Start free, no card.