I2C VS UDS (ISO 14229)
As of 30 October 2026, UDS (ISO 14229) is named by 128 companies and I2C by 1,146; I2C skews to companies under 200 people (53% vs 33%), UDS (ISO 14229) to companies over 1,000 (43% 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, UDS (ISO 14229) rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- I2C: 2–200 employees
- 53%
- UDS (ISO 14229): 2–200 employees
- 33%
- I2C: 1,000+ employees
- 24%
- UDS (ISO 14229): 1,000+ employees
- 43%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 3.6 · 3.5
- 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 | UDS (ISO 14229) | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 11 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| 2-10 employees | 120 | 10% | 8 | 6% | I2C |
| 11-50 employees | 210 | 18% | 11 | 9% | I2C |
| 51-200 employees | 277 | 24% | 23 | 18% | I2C |
| 201-500 employees | 167 | 15% | 18 | 14% | even |
| 501-1000 employees | 81 | 7% | 13 | 10% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| 1001-5000 employees | 129 | 11% | 15 | 12% | even |
| 5001-10000 employees | 43 | 4% | 5 | 4% | even |
| 10,001+ employees | 108 | 9% | 35 | 27% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Segment | I2C | share | UDS (ISO 14229) | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 570 | 50% | 28 | 22% | I2C |
| Technology & software | 265 | 23% | 25 | 20% | I2C |
| Business & finance services | 110 | 10% | 9 | 7% | I2C |
| Automotive | 39 | 3% | 29 | 23% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Commerce & trade | 38 | 3% | 2 | 2% | even |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 28 | 2% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 22 | 2% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 18 | 2% | 4 | 3% | even |
| Property & construction | 15 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Media & content | 14 | 1% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 13 | 1% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Health care | 9 | 1% | 24 | 19% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Hospitality & travel | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | I2C | share | UDS (ISO 14229) | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 700 | 61% | 83 | 65% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Germany | 70 | 6% | 10 | 8% | even |
| United Kingdom | 63 | 5% | 4 | 3% | I2C |
| India | 36 | 3% | 2 | 2% | even |
| France | 33 | 3% | 9 | 7% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Canada | 30 | 3% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Netherlands | 18 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Sweden | 16 | 1% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Italy | 15 | 1% | 2 | 2% | even |
| Spain | 13 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Poland | 12 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Australia | 11 | 1% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Türkiye | – | – | 2 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| United Arab Emirates | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Austria | – | – | 1 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | I2C | share | UDS (ISO 14229) | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Software engineering | 2,655 | 46% | 244 | 41% | I2C |
| Engineering (non-software) | 2,315 | 40% | 113 | 19% | I2C |
| IT operations & business systems | 112 | 2% | 26 | 4% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Sales | 48 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Quality, safety & environment | 34 | 1% | 21 | 4% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Data & AI | 17 | 0% | 13 | 2% | even |
| Design & UX | 15 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Skilled trades and field service | 13 | 0% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Product, program & project management | 11 | 0% | 15 | 3% | UDS (ISO 14229) |
| Finance & accounting | 10 | 0% | 9 | 2% | even |
| Customer service & success | 6 | 0% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Unclassified | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Healthcare clinical | – | – | 17 | 3% | outside top 12 |
| Healthcare support and caregiving | – | – | 7 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Administration & office | – | – | 5 | 1% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using I2C →
Companies using UDS (ISO 14229) →
iot platforms protocols ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
UDS (ISO 14229) is named by 128 companies in job postings and I2C by 1,146; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/i2c-vs-uds-iso-14229)
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 UDS (ISO 14229): questions
Which is more used, I2C or UDS (ISO 14229)?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, I2C (1,146) over UDS (ISO 14229) (128). By website-and-DNS footprint, UDS (ISO 14229) (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 33% for UDS (ISO 14229). 24% of I2C companies have over 1,000 employees, against 43% for UDS (ISO 14229).
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually I2C in marketing and UDS (ISO 14229) 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 UDS (ISO 14229). Start free, no card.