SAE J1939 alternatives
As of 4 November 2026, 39 iot platforms protocols are named by companies instead of SAE J1939: Modbus by 2,067 companies, CAN bus by 1,760, SPI by 1,559.
As of 4 November 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
- SAE J1939, companies in postings
- 179
- Most used alternative
- Modbus · 2,067
- Fastest hiring, 90 days
- Modbus
- Alternatives ranked
- 39
- Catalogue
- T-1.0.1-prov
iot platforms protocols companies choose instead of SAE J1939
Companies naming each tool in their own postings, and postings in the last 90 days. Bars are relative to the category leader.
| # | Alternative | Companies | companies | vs SAE J1939 | postings, 90 d | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ModbusModbus Organization | 2,067 | 1155% | 5,698 | SAE J1939 vs Modbus → | |
| 2 | CAN busISO | 1,760 | 983% | 5,610 | SAE J1939 vs CAN bus → | |
| 3 | SPIMotorola | 1,559 | 871% | 4,935 | SAE J1939 vs SPI → | |
| 4 | I2CNXP | 1,515 | 846% | 4,820 | SAE J1939 vs I2C → | |
| 5 | UART(industry standard) | 1,237 | 691% | 3,224 | SAE J1939 vs UART → | |
| 6 | MQTTOASIS | 1,201 | 671% | 2,656 | SAE J1939 vs MQTT → | |
| 7 | EtherNet/IPODVA | 1,048 | 585% | 2,374 | SAE J1939 vs EtherNet/IP → | |
| 8 | OPC UAOPC Foundation | 935 | 522% | 2,090 | SAE J1939 vs OPC UA → | |
| 9 | PROFINETPROFIBUS & PROFINET International | 914 | 511% | 2,036 | SAE J1939 vs PROFINET → | |
| 10 | PROFIBUSPROFIBUS & PROFINET International | 701 | 392% | 1,645 | SAE J1939 vs PROFIBUS → | |
| 11 | BACnetASHRAE | 598 | 334% | 1,743 | SAE J1939 vs BACnet → | |
| 12 | USBUSB Implementers Forum | 597 | 334% | 1,786 | SAE J1939 vs USB → | |
| 13 | Bluetooth Low EnergyBluetooth SIG | 473 | 264% | 934 | SAE J1939 vs Bluetooth Low Energy → | |
| 14 | RS-485TIA | 464 | 259% | 1,001 | SAE J1939 vs RS-485 → | |
| 15 | OPC (OPC UA)OPC Foundation | 451 | 252% | 1,193 | SAE J1939 vs OPC (OPC UA) → | |
| 16 | RS-232EIA | 446 | 249% | 1,038 | SAE J1939 vs RS-232 → | |
| 17 | KNXKNX Association | 401 | 224% | 703 | SAE J1939 vs KNX → | |
| 18 | EtherCATEtherCAT Technology Group | 378 | 211% | 884 | SAE J1939 vs EtherCAT → | |
| 19 | BluetoothBluetooth SIG | 346 | 193% | 659 | SAE J1939 vs Bluetooth → | |
| 20 | IEC 61850IEC | 324 | 181% | 1,126 | SAE J1939 vs IEC 61850 → | |
| 21 | DNP3IEEE | 321 | 179% | 895 | SAE J1939 vs DNP3 → | |
| 22 | DeviceNetODVA | 285 | 159% | 598 | SAE J1939 vs DeviceNet → | |
| 23 | DDS (Data Distribution Service)Object Management Group | 280 | 156% | 663 | SAE J1939 vs DDS (Data Distribution Service) → | |
| 24 | LIN BusLIN Consortium | 266 | 149% | 1,210 | SAE J1939 vs LIN Bus → | |
| 25 | CAN FDBosch | 181 | 101% | 545 | SAE J1939 vs CAN FD → | |
| 26 | RS-422TIA/EIA | 180 | 101% | 607 | SAE J1939 vs RS-422 → | |
| 27 | ZigbeeConnectivity Standards Alliance | 179 | 100% | 427 | SAE J1939 vs Zigbee → | |
| 28 | 175 | 98% | 552 | SAE J1939 vs UDS (ISO 14229) → | ||
| 29 | 168 | 94% | 380 | SAE J1939 vs GPIO → | ||
| 30 | CANopenCAN in Automation | 162 | 91% | 293 | SAE J1939 vs CANopen → | |
| 31 | NFCNFC Forum | 147 | 82% | 366 | SAE J1939 vs NFC → | |
| 32 | DMX512USITT | 122 | 68% | 150 | soon | |
| 33 | LonWorksEchelon | 115 | 64% | 403 | soon | |
| 34 | ARINCSAE ITT | 114 | 64% | 492 | soon | |
| 35 | EcoStruxureSchneider Electric | 109 | 61% | 339 | soon | |
| 36 | LoRaWANLoRa Alliance | 108 | 60% | 185 | soon | |
| 37 | Azure IoT HubMicrosoft | 100 | 56% | 162 | soon | |
| 38 | DALIDiiA | 99 | 55% | 154 | soon | |
| 39 | HART ProtocolFieldComm Group | 99 | 55% | 265 | soon |
Filter on any of them, or on SAE J1939 users who also name an alternative, and open the person who owns the stack.
Start free, no card. The first 20 are above; e-mails are verified at the mail server when you open them.
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
39 iot platforms protocols are named by companies instead of SAE J1939: Modbus by 2,067 companies, CAN bus by 1,760, SPI by 1,559, measured from their own job postings. (Breaknorm, 4 November 2026, https://breaknorm.co/tools/j1939/alternatives)
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 →
- RankingCompanies whose own postings name the tool as the team's system, from the Breaknorm technology catalogue T-1.0.1-prov. Editions are folded into their parent product.
- 90-day postingsOpen postings first seen or posted in the last 90 days that name the tool.
- Not includedRatings, prices, feature claims, sponsored positions.
SAE J1939 alternatives: questions
What is the most used alternative to SAE J1939?
Modbus: 2,067 companies name it in their own job postings, against 179 for SAE J1939.
How is this list ranked?
By the number of companies whose own postings name the tool as the team's system (Breaknorm technology catalogue T-1.0.1-prov), then by postings in the last 90 days. No ratings, no vendor input, no sponsored positions.
Does this say which is better?
No. It says who uses what, by company size, industry and country, so you can see which tools companies like yours choose. For features and prices, read the vendors.
Can I get the companies on any of these?
Yes: click the tool, see the first 20 companies, and sign up for the full list with verified e-mails. Counting is free.
Get these companies 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 SAE J1939
or on what replaces it
Connect the MCP server, filter on any tool. Start free, no card.