Omron VS Structured Text
As of 30 October 2026, Structured Text is named by 206 companies and Omron by 277; Omron skews to companies under 200 people (32% vs 38%), Structured Text to companies over 1,000 (36% 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: Omron's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, Structured Text rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- Omron: 2–200 employees
- 32%
- Structured Text: 2–200 employees
- 38%
- Omron: 1,000+ employees
- 47%
- Structured Text: 1,000+ employees
- 36%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 2.4 · 1.9
- 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 | Omron | share | Structured Text | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 1 | 0% | 2 | 1% | even |
| 2-10 employees | 17 | 6% | 12 | 6% | even |
| 11-50 employees | 26 | 9% | 31 | 15% | Structured Text |
| 51-200 employees | 46 | 17% | 36 | 17% | even |
| 201-500 employees | 32 | 12% | 30 | 15% | Structured Text |
| 501-1000 employees | 25 | 9% | 20 | 10% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 48 | 17% | 34 | 17% | even |
| 5001-10000 employees | 22 | 8% | 12 | 6% | Omron |
| 10,001+ employees | 60 | 22% | 29 | 14% | Omron |
| Segment | Omron | share | Structured Text | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 189 | 68% | 122 | 59% | Omron |
| Automotive | 25 | 9% | 15 | 7% | even |
| Commerce & trade | 18 | 6% | 7 | 3% | Omron |
| Business & finance services | 16 | 6% | 13 | 6% | even |
| Property & construction | 8 | 3% | 9 | 4% | even |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 7 | 3% | 13 | 6% | Structured Text |
| Technology & software | 4 | 1% | 13 | 6% | Structured Text |
| Media & content | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Public, community & associations | 2 | 1% | 5 | 2% | even |
| Health care | 2 | 1% | 3 | 1% | even |
| Agriculture & forestry | 1 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 1 | 0% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Transport, logistics & rental | – | – | 3 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | Omron | share | Structured Text | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 146 | 53% | 119 | 58% | Structured Text |
| Canada | 24 | 9% | 10 | 5% | Omron |
| Germany | 15 | 5% | 21 | 10% | Structured Text |
| United Kingdom | 15 | 5% | 7 | 3% | Omron |
| France | 10 | 4% | 7 | 3% | even |
| Spain | 8 | 3% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Australia | 7 | 3% | 2 | 1% | even |
| India | 7 | 3% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Italy | 7 | 3% | 6 | 3% | even |
| Netherlands | 5 | 2% | 7 | 3% | even |
| Switzerland | 4 | 1% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Finland | 4 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Denmark | – | – | 3 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Norway | – | – | 3 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Bulgaria | – | – | 2 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | Omron | share | Structured Text | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engineering (non-software) | 451 | 52% | 338 | 68% | Structured Text |
| Skilled trades and field service | 226 | 26% | 29 | 6% | Omron |
| Software engineering | 19 | 2% | 73 | 15% | Structured Text |
| Sales | 18 | 2% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Construction and civil | 8 | 1% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Product, program & project management | 6 | 1% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Unclassified | 5 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Business development & strategy | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Quality, safety & environment | 4 | 0% | 3 | 1% | even |
| Education & training | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Manufacturing and production | 3 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| IT operations & business systems | 2 | 0% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Customer service & success | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
| Data & AI | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using Omron →
Companies using Structured Text →
plc programming ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
Structured Text is named by 206 companies in job postings and Omron by 277; 14 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/omron-vs-structured-text)
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.
Omron vs Structured Text: questions
Which is more used, Omron or Structured Text?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Omron (277) over Structured Text (206). By website-and-DNS footprint, Structured Text (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses Omron?
32% of Omron companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 38% for Structured Text. 47% of Omron companies have over 1,000 employees, against 36% for Structured Text.
Do companies run both?
14 companies name both in their postings, usually Omron in marketing and Structured Text 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 Omron or Structured Text. Start free, no card.