CNIPA.AI

Company patentsCompare

HEAD TO HEAD

MicrosoftPetroChina

Technology portfolios compared in the same window and counting units. Scale is compared only within the same field or subclass.

Same window · published 2025-01-01 — 2025-12-31Some name or date coverage is incomplete; affected counts are lower bounds

This is a structural comparison of collected portfolios. The same requested window does not establish equal entity scope, covered months or industry; no competitive ranking is inferred.

Applicant-name coverage differs. The counts below cover only the listed names and do not represent complete company portfolios.

Microsoft: Applicant names included in these statistics — MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLCReviewed names not covered — MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC · MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC.

PetroChina: Applicant names included in these statistics — PETROCHINA CO LTDReviewed names not covered — PETROCHINA COMPANY LIMITED · 中国石油天然气股份有限公司

Publications
7,140
Invention share
97%
Concentration
0.59
Green technology
—
Publications
6,110
Invention share
95%
Concentration
0.25
Green technology
—
0.46Field similarity
Cosine similarity of application counts across 35 fields. 1 is identical, 0 is no overlap.

01Technology field mirror

The 12 fields with the largest combined share. Share shows structure; count shows scale.

Technology field mirror
MicrosoftTechnology fieldPetroChina
72.5%
Computer technology
22.4%
0.3%
Civil engineering
31.5%
2.1%
Measurement
22.9%
22.4%
Digital communication
0.7%
4.2%
IT methods for management
9.5%
0.1%
Basic materials chemistry
11.9%
10.5%
Audio-visual technology
0.4%
0.2%
Chemical engineering
9%
0%
Macromolecular chemistry, polymers
6.9%
2.1%
Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
3.6%
0.1%
Environmental technology
4.2%
0.3%
Mechanical elements
3.7%

Inspect one technology field

Inspect collected applications, portfolio share and supporting publications within one field. A technology overlap does not establish that companies in different industries are direct competitors.

One application may belong to multiple fields, so shares can sum to more than 100%. Drill-down lists publications; an application publication and its grant may appear separately.

02Same problem: shared IPC subclasses

The 10 subclasses in every company's top 60 with the most combined applications. Scale is compared within a subclass, never across different business scopes.

G06FData processing
Microsoft3,890
PetroChina1,114
H04LDigital transmission
Microsoft1,379
PetroChina32
G06NComputing models, AI
Microsoft1,064
PetroChina268
G06QBusiness data processing
Microsoft290
PetroChina577
G01NAnalysing materials
Microsoft12
PetroChina752
G06TImage processing
Microsoft479
PetroChina180
B01J
Microsoft10
PetroChina385
G06VImage and video recognition
Microsoft295
PetroChina81
G16C
Microsoft30
PetroChina103
H02JPower supply, energy storage
Microsoft54
PetroChina69

03Where each one leans

Observed emphasis within each company’s collected top-60 IPC subclasses. A dash for another company means outside its top-60 list, not zero applications or a market gap. Incomplete coverage can also change the ordering.

Microsoft

  • G06FData processing
    Microsoft
    3,890
    PetroChina
    1,114
  • H04LDigital transmission
    Microsoft
    1,379
    PetroChina
    32
  • G06NComputing models, AI
    Microsoft
    1,064
    PetroChina
    268
  • H04NPictorial communication, video
    Microsoft
    482
    PetroChina
    —
  • G06TImage processing
    Microsoft
    479
    PetroChina
    180
  • G10LSpeech processing
    Microsoft
    250
    PetroChina
    —

PetroChina

  • E21B
    Microsoft
    —
    PetroChina
    1,882
  • G01NAnalysing materials
    Microsoft
    12
    PetroChina
    752
  • G01V
    Microsoft
    —
    PetroChina
    571
  • B01J
    Microsoft
    10
    PetroChina
    385
  • C09KMaterials for applications
    Microsoft
    —
    PetroChina
    330
  • G06QBusiness data processing
    Microsoft
    290
    PetroChina
    577

04Publication rhythm

MicrosoftPetroChinaPublications per period
Publications per period
PeriodMicrosoftPetroChina
2025-01≥539 (partial coverage)≥410 (partial coverage)
2025-02≥503 (partial coverage)≥695 (partial coverage)
2025-03≥603 (partial coverage)≥574 (partial coverage)
2025-04≥647 (partial coverage)≥558 (partial coverage)
2025-05≥566 (partial coverage)≥1,028 (partial coverage)
2025-06≥487 (partial coverage)≥674 (partial coverage)
2025-07≥686 (partial coverage)≥299 (partial coverage)
2025-08≥563 (partial coverage)≥143 (partial coverage)
2025-09≥587 (partial coverage)≥486 (partial coverage)
2025-10≥689 (partial coverage)≥403 (partial coverage)
2025-11≥582 (partial coverage)≥383 (partial coverage)
2025-12≥688 (partial coverage)≥457 (partial coverage)

Empty dashed outlines mark uncollected periods. Hatched bars and ≥ counts mark partial coverage.

Publication timing follows examination and publication cycles, not R&D intensity.

What makes it comparableThe same publication window and counting units. Companies with different windows are not put in one comparison.

What is not comparableGroup totals. Business and entity scopes differ; compare scale within a field or subclass.

Not a rankingSimilarity and shares describe structure, not patent value, quality or technical leadership.