I2C VS SAE J1939
As of 30 October 2026, SAE J1939 is named by 152 companies and I2C by 1,146; I2C skews to companies under 200 people (53% vs 32%), SAE J1939 to companies over 1,000 (45% vs 24%).
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: I2C's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, SAE J1939 rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- I2C: 2–200 employees
- 53%
- SAE J1939: 2–200 employees
- 32%
- I2C: 1,000+ employees
- 24%
- SAE J1939: 1,000+ employees
- 45%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 3.6 · 2.8
- 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 | I2C | share | SAE J1939 | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 11 | 1% | 2 | 1% | even |
| 2-10 employees | 120 | 10% | 6 | 4% | I2C |
| 11-50 employees | 210 | 18% | 11 | 7% | I2C |
| 51-200 employees | 277 | 24% | 32 | 21% | I2C |
| 201-500 employees | 167 | 15% | 23 | 15% | even |
| 501-1000 employees | 81 | 7% | 10 | 7% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 129 | 11% | 25 | 16% | SAE J1939 |
| 5001-10000 employees | 43 | 4% | 9 | 6% | SAE J1939 |
| 10,001+ employees | 108 | 9% | 34 | 22% | SAE J1939 |
| Segment | I2C | share | SAE J1939 | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 570 | 50% | 65 | 43% | I2C |
| Technology & software | 265 | 23% | 24 | 16% | I2C |
| Business & finance services | 110 | 10% | 12 | 8% | even |
| Automotive | 39 | 3% | 27 | 18% | SAE J1939 |
| Commerce & trade | 38 | 3% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 28 | 2% | 5 | 3% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 22 | 2% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 18 | 2% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Property & construction | 15 | 1% | 5 | 3% | even |
| Media & content | 14 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 13 | 1% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Health care | 9 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Agriculture & forestry | – | – | 2 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Hospitality & travel | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | I2C | share | SAE J1939 | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 700 | 61% | 99 | 65% | SAE J1939 |
| Germany | 70 | 6% | 12 | 8% | even |
| United Kingdom | 63 | 5% | 5 | 3% | I2C |
| India | 36 | 3% | 4 | 3% | even |
| France | 33 | 3% | 7 | 5% | even |
| Canada | 30 | 3% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Netherlands | 18 | 2% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Sweden | 16 | 1% | 6 | 4% | SAE J1939 |
| Italy | 15 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Spain | 13 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Poland | 12 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Australia | 11 | 1% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Brazil | – | – | 2 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| United Arab Emirates | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Austria | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | I2C | share | SAE J1939 | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Software engineering | 2,655 | 46% | 184 | 36% | I2C |
| Engineering (non-software) | 2,315 | 40% | 201 | 39% | even |
| IT operations & business systems | 112 | 2% | 7 | 1% | even |
| Sales | 48 | 1% | 8 | 2% | even |
| Quality, safety & environment | 34 | 1% | 3 | 1% | even |
| Data & AI | 17 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Design & UX | 15 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Skilled trades and field service | 13 | 0% | 15 | 3% | SAE J1939 |
| Product, program & project management | 11 | 0% | 9 | 2% | even |
| Finance & accounting | 10 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Customer service & success | 6 | 0% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Unclassified | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Logistics warehouse and transport | – | – | 4 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Arts media and entertainment | – | – | 3 | 1% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using I2C →
Companies using SAE J1939 →
iot platforms protocols ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
SAE J1939 is named by 152 companies in job postings and I2C by 1,146; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/i2c-vs-j1939)
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.
I2C vs SAE J1939: questions
Which is more used, I2C or SAE J1939?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, I2C (1,146) over SAE J1939 (152). By website-and-DNS footprint, SAE J1939 (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses I2C?
53% of I2C companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 32% for SAE J1939. 24% of I2C companies have over 1,000 employees, against 45% for SAE J1939.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually I2C in marketing and SAE J1939 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 I2C or SAE J1939. Start free, no card.