Shipvane · 4 AE roles
Marco E. · joined Cargolio
Fleetora · first roles in DEUN/EDIFACT VS Model Context Protocol_
As of 30 October 2026, Model Context Protocol is named by 3,710 companies and UN/EDIFACT by 182; UN/EDIFACT skews to companies under 200 people (28% vs 42%), Model Context Protocol to companies over 1,000 (31% vs 47%).
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: UN/EDIFACT's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, Model Context Protocol rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- UN/EDIFACT: 2–200 employees
- 28%
- Model Context Protocol: 2–200 employees
- 42%
- UN/EDIFACT: 1,000+ employees
- 47%
- Model Context Protocol: 1,000+ employees
- 31%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 1.9 · 3.2
- 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 | UN/EDIFACT | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 4 | 2% | 64 | 2% | even |
| 2-10 employees | 9 | 5% | 252 | 7% | even |
| 11-50 employees | 18 | 10% | 490 | 13% | Model Context Protocol |
| 51-200 employees | 24 | 13% | 800 | 22% | Model Context Protocol |
| 201-500 employees | 24 | 13% | 548 | 15% | even |
| 501-1000 employees | 18 | 10% | 408 | 11% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 38 | 21% | 612 | 16% | UN/EDIFACT |
| 5001-10000 employees | 13 | 7% | 160 | 4% | UN/EDIFACT |
| 10,001+ employees | 34 | 19% | 376 | 10% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Segment | UN/EDIFACT | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technology & software | 57 | 31% | 1,931 | 52% | Model Context Protocol |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 34 | 19% | 50 | 1% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Manufacturing & industry | 33 | 18% | 276 | 7% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 15 | 8% | 85 | 2% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Business & finance services | 14 | 8% | 781 | 21% | Model Context Protocol |
| Automotive | 7 | 4% | 30 | 1% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Commerce & trade | 7 | 4% | 99 | 3% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 3 | 2% | 85 | 2% | even |
| Hospitality & travel | 3 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Media & content | 3 | 2% | 145 | 4% | Model Context Protocol |
| Health care | 2 | 1% | 67 | 2% | even |
| Property & construction | 2 | 1% | 48 | 1% | even |
| Public, community & associations | – | – | 82 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | UN/EDIFACT | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 85 | 47% | 2,391 | 64% | Model Context Protocol |
| Germany | 51 | 28% | 212 | 6% | UN/EDIFACT |
| France | 10 | 5% | 103 | 3% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Canada | 6 | 3% | 106 | 3% | even |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 3% | 285 | 8% | Model Context Protocol |
| Netherlands | 4 | 2% | 52 | 1% | even |
| Australia | 3 | 2% | 41 | 1% | even |
| Austria | 2 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Italy | 2 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% | 42 | 1% | even |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% | 32 | 1% | even |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| India | – | – | 52 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Spain | – | – | 33 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Poland | – | – | 32 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | UN/EDIFACT | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Software engineering | 130 | 27% | 4,101 | 28% | even |
| IT operations & business systems | 127 | 27% | 1,440 | 10% | UN/EDIFACT |
| Product, program & project management | 21 | 4% | 659 | 5% | even |
| Data & AI | 12 | 3% | 4,805 | 33% | Model Context Protocol |
| General management & consulting | 9 | 2% | 76 | 1% | even |
| Customer service & success | 5 | 1% | 146 | 1% | even |
| Finance & accounting | 5 | 1% | 63 | 0% | even |
| Sales | 5 | 1% | 461 | 3% | Model Context Protocol |
| Marketing & communications | 4 | 1% | 171 | 1% | even |
| skilled trades and field service | 4 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| procurement and purchasing | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Engineering (non-software) | 2 | 0% | 205 | 1% | even |
| Design & UX | – | – | 109 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Business development & strategy | – | – | 62 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using UN/EDIFACT →
Companies using Model Context Protocol →
api specs data formats ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
Model Context Protocol is named by 3,710 companies in job postings and UN/EDIFACT by 182; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/edifact-vs-model-context-protocol)
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.
UN/EDIFACT vs Model Context Protocol: questions
Which is more used, UN/EDIFACT or Model Context Protocol?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Model Context Protocol (3,710) over UN/EDIFACT (182). By website-and-DNS footprint, Model Context Protocol (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses UN/EDIFACT?
28% of UN/EDIFACT companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 42% for Model Context Protocol. 47% of UN/EDIFACT companies have over 1,000 employees, against 31% for Model Context Protocol.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually UN/EDIFACT in marketing and Model Context Protocol 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 UN/EDIFACT or Model Context Protocol, and get 1,000 records free.