Resonant Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Resonant Inc (RESN) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Resonant Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 2M vs 218,463M combined for tracked competitors (0.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-2.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-27.8%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Resonant Inc generated -12.5% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2021, vs 27.6% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its -1,712.6% net margin compares with 28.1% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Resonant Inc accounted for 0.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 0.0% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.04M compares with $0.82M for the peer group (0.1x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
RESN Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Resonant Inc reported revenue contraction of 12.52 % year on year in Q4 2021, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 27.60 %.
With a net margin of -1,712.62 %, Resonant Inc reported lower profitability than its competitors (28.13 %).
Resonant Inc generated 0.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 0.00 % a year earlier.
Resonant Inc vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Resonant Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (6) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Resonant Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Semiconductors industry grew revenue 10.5% year over year, combined, vs -12.5% for Resonant Inc. Resonant Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.00% to 0.00%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Resonant Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | No | No | No | Yes |
| Competitors combined (36) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 28.60 % (2 of 7) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
RESN Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
RESN Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Maxlinear Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Marvell Technology Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Semtech Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Macom Technology Solutions Holdings Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Quicklogic Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Resonant Inc's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Resonant Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
To our knowledge, we have no direct competitors in the electronic design automation
or licensing business that are exclusively focused on RFFEs. We have spent many
years developing ISN®, and our own patented suite of design tools created
specifically for this purpose. No comparable acoustic wave filter design tool
exists in the market today to our knowledge. In combination with our experienced
design team, we believe we offer our customers a novel solution to the need
for increasingly complex filter designs developed by an independent, stand-alone
company that is not presently offered by any other company.
We have advantages that we believe present significant barriers to entry for
potential competitors that desire to replicate our business model:
a large and growing portfolio of patents;
a suite of proprietary software design tools;
a growing number of customers;
a highly experienced design team; and
a multi-year technology lead.
We do compete with the existing filter designs and design capabilities of the
design teams at our customers and target customers and their filter manufacturers.
We must demonstrate to our customers, target customers and their filter manufacturers,
that switching to our designs will give them a competitive advantage by providing
market entry or sufficiently improving the cost, size, and performance of their
current products to justify our royalty rates.
The use of our patented ISN tools, not only enables lower cost and smaller size
SAW solutions for single band and multiplexer designs but also enables development
of creative filter solutions for next generation RFFE architectures that, if
successful will offer new, highly competitive solutions to many of the challenges
facing the manufacturers of RFFE modules.
Publicly Traded Peers of Resonant Inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | 279.91 | 2.18 |
| Broadcom Inc | 1,735,373.70 | 89,104.00 |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | 259,154.80 | 19,453.00 |
| Marvell Technology Inc | 235,179.09 | 8,715.90 |
| Qualcomm Inc | 196,802.90 | 44,069.00 |
| Analog Devices Inc | 195,310.18 | 12,740.34 |
| SUBTOTAL | 2,986,658.89 | 221,236.06 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Resonant Inc .
Sources: Resonant Inc's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Resonant Inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Resonant Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Aeye Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Resonant Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Resonant Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Broadcom Inc | Semiconductor Solutions 64.81 % |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | Analog 81.33 % |
| Marvell Technology Inc | Reportable 100.00 % |
| Qualcomm Inc | QCT 85.49 % |
| On Semiconductor Corporation | Automative 52.69 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Resonant Inc's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | 280 | 41,094 | -678,679 |
| Broadcom Inc | 1,735,374 | 2,700,121 | 1,159,545 |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | 259,155 | 589,485 | 183,394 |
| Marvell Technology Inc | 235,179 | 1,165,227 | 676,350 |
| Qualcomm Inc | 196,803 | 847,481 | 178,058 |
| Analog Devices Inc | 195,310 | 520,014 | 135,242 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 2,986,379 | 821,027 | 246,700 |
Resonant Inc's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | Japan 73.37 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Asia Pacific 60.15 % |
| Marvell Technology Inc | China 43.75 % |
| Monolithic Power Systems Inc | CN 51.13 % |
| Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd | United States 65.72 % |
| On Semiconductor Corporation | United Kingdom 25.92 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Resonant Inc's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Semiconductors industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (151 companies). See the full Semiconductors industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 100.00 % | 34.40 % (avg) | +65.6 pp |
| Operating Margin | -1,650.78 % | industry median | -1,659.8 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | -1,610.15 % | 7.07 % (avg) | -1,617.2 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 90.04 % | 9.39 % (avg) | +80.6 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Resonant Inc's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Semiconductors industry average (151 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Semiconductors industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | - | 43.3x | - |
| EV / EBITDA | - | 22.7x | - |
| P/B | 6.2x | 6.6x | -0.4x |
| Return on Equity | -187.28 % | industry aggregate | -212.09 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -85.91 % | -0.16 % (avg) | -85.75 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Resonant Inc's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -24.65 % | 40.27 % | 329.93 % | -31.08 % |
| Operating Margin | -3,958.22 % | -4,103.27 % | -900.85 % | -1,650.78 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -42.48 % | -100.75 % | -56.01 % | -85.91 % |
| P/E | - | - | - | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Resonant Inc's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Resonant Inc's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Resonant Inc is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Resonant Inc's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Barriers to Entry | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 90.04 % vs industry average 9.39 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Resonant Inc's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Resonant Inc's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Resonant Inc's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Resonant Inc falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Resonant Inc's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
No rule matched.
Weaknesses
- Operating margin 1,659.8 points below the industry median.
- Return on equity 212.1 points below the industry aggregate.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-2.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below, the standard financial-distress signal.
Opportunities
- Industry revenue growing at a healthy 10.3% median pace.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-27.8% annualized).
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Resonant Inc's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | 3.33 | 3.62 | - |
| Broadcom Inc | 0.99 | 2.05 | 0.75 |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | 1.09 | 4.53 | 0.88 |
| Marvell Technology Inc | 0.98 | 2.25 | 0.31 |
| Qualcomm Inc | 0.53 | 2.47 | 0.62 |
| Analog Devices Inc | 0.70 | 2.08 | 0.25 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Resonant Inc's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | Q4 2021 | -12.5 % | - |
| Broadcom Inc | Q2 2026 | +85.5 % | +216.1 % |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | Q2 2026 | +22.8 % | +52.9 % |
| Marvell Technology Inc | Q1 2026 | +27.6 % | -70.1 % |
| Qualcomm Inc | Q2 2026 | -4.0 % | -24.9 % |
| Analog Devices Inc | Q1 2026 | +37.2 % | +106.5 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +38.0 % | +98.8 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Resonant Inc's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | Q4 2021 | - | -12.5 % |
| Broadcom Inc | Q2 2026 | +74.0 % | +274.6 % |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | Q2 2026 | +12.7 % | -60.6 % |
| Marvell Technology Inc | Q1 2026 | +22.8 % | +30.3 % |
| Qualcomm Inc | Q2 2026 | +1.4 % | +68.7 % |
| Analog Devices Inc | Q1 2026 | +15.1 % | - |
Resonant Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | - | - | - |
| Broadcom Inc | 21.57% | 24.07% | 43.74% |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | 17.31% | 18.74% | 35.77% |
| Marvell Technology Inc | 22.14% | 25.02% | 33.73% |
| Qualcomm Inc | 17.24% | 21.12% | 38.04% |
| Analog Devices Inc | 6.90% | 7.53% | 9.78% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Resonant Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Resonant Inc | - | 128.52 |
| Broadcom Inc | 45.24 | 19.48 |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated | 42.88 | 13.32 |
| Marvell Technology Inc | 90.29 | 26.98 |
| Qualcomm Inc | 21.14 | 4.47 |
| Analog Devices Inc | 59.26 | 15.33 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 44.95 | 13.50 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.