Acorn Energy Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Acorn Energy Inc (ACFN) 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: Acorn Energy Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 9M vs -M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+11.8% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Scale: Acorn Energy Inc ranks #62 of 88 companies by market capitalization in the Construction Services industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Acorn Energy Inc accounted for 100.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 100.0% a year earlier.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
ACFN Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Acorn Energy Inc generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.
For context: the Construction Services industry grew revenue 20.2% year over year, combined, vs -29.4% for Acorn Energy Inc. Acorn Energy Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.00% to 0.00%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Acorn Energy 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acorn Energy Inc | Yes | No | No | No |
| Similar-Size Competitors (6) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 50.00 % (4 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 of 8) |
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.
ACFN Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
ACFN Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
ACFN Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
Acorn Energy Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Our Energy & Security Sonar Solutions segment faces competition from several competitors, large and small, operating in worldwide markets (such as Sonardyne International Ltd. and Atlas Elektronik (both based in the United Kingdom) and the Kongsberg group of companies (based in Norway)) with substantially greater financial and marketing resources, particularly with respect to our energy and security sonar solutions. We believe that our wide range of experience and long-term relationships with large businesses as well as the strategic partnerships that we are developing will enable us to compete successfully and obtain future business. In product demonstrations to potential customers, DSIT’s AquaShieldTM has consistently achieved better performance regarding detection range and automatic classification, than its main competitor. DSIT has sold its AquaShieldTM DDS system to the Israeli Navy following a comprehensive review and evaluation process in which the Navy investigated competing systems and selected those of DSIT. DSIT anticipates additional orders from the Israeli Navy for additional systems. We also face competition from other competitors (such as Whitehead Sistemi Subacquei (WASS) in Italy and Ultra Electronics in the UK in the area of portable acoustic ranges and the Thales group of companies (based in France) in the area of HMS.
The industry in which GridSense operates is characterized by intense competition from both large, established companies as well as smaller companies with specialized offerings. Such competitors include General Electric, Siemens, Qualitrol Company LLC, PowerSense, Sentient Energy, Inc., and Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories. To avoid direct competition with larger, more established companies, GridSense focuses on niches where it can offer a differentiated product based on superior cost and performance. In the niche market, GridSense competes against Power Delivery Product, Sentient and Cooper. These companies have varying degrees of similar products at comparable price points. As GridSense grows and penetrates markets where larger companies have been established, it may experience more competition. GridSense is in a field where electronics and software/firmware dominate. This fast changing area may generate new methods of detecting and monitoring disturbances. GridSense closely monitors trends and changes in technologies and customer demand that could adversely impact its competitiveness and overall success.
OmniMetrix is a vertical market company, deeply focused on product and service
designs for a complete end-to-end program for its customers. Having been the
first (1998) provider of wireless remote monitoring systems for standby generators
and pipeline corrosion programs, the company has had the opportunity to mature
its offering to a level not offered by others who might like to compete in these
two segments. This long experience working with key brand project partners over
the years has resulted in product offerings that other competitors simply cannot
match.
There are two types of competitors in the PG marketplace:
(1) Independent monitoring organizations (such as OmniMetrix) that produce the
monitoring systems, but not the equipment being monitored. Among these are companies
such as Ayantra, FleetZOOM, Gen-Tracker, and PointGuard. PointGuard is owned
by a Caterpillar dealer, and focuses its business on the Caterpillar channel.
Today it offers an array of diagnostic capabilities. The other three competitors
operate in the reactive “failure notification” mode described in
the early stages of the OmniMetrix business model. In the past, those competitors
positioned themselves at a lower performance, lower price quadrant of the market.
Following its acquisition by Acorn in 2012, OmniMetrix began an aggressive push
into lower price offerings, while providing significantly higher performance
than the competition.
(2) OEMs such as generator manufacturers or generator controls manufacturers
have begun offering customer connectivity to their machinery. They offer a current
generation connectivity replacing telephone dial-up modems that had been used
in the past. Their offerings are limited to their own brands, so they do not
fit into a broad application such as does the OmniMetrix SmartServiceTM, supporting
service organizations that service all brands. They are also generally designed
for the machine owners’ use, in a reactive application. Deep Sea Electronics
offers wireless devices to allow remote access to generators with some of their
controls. Similarly, Cummins Power Generation offers a device that allows their
machine owners to browse directly into the generator. This device is only valid
for certain types of their generators.
We believe OmniMetrix has a well-established and well-defended position in the
high performance PG monitoring segment, due to its long history and numerous
industry partner projects. The company is currently applying an aggressive sales
effort into both the market segment requiring less technology and lower price
(including the extremely large residential generator market) as well as developing
more sophisticated, diagnostic products and custom solutions for commercial
clientele.
Within the PM marketplace, there are no OEM competitors, but there are several
independent monitoring companies similar to OmniMetrix such as Abriox, Elecsys,
and American Innovations. We believe that OmniMetrix systems provide greater
functionality that these competitors, though those competitors are much larger
and have greater resources enabling better channel penetration than OmniMetrix
can accomplish.
Acorn Energy 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 |
|---|---|---|
| PowerTelematics | Named by the company | 85% |
| FleetZOOM | Named by the company | 85% |
| Ayantra | Named by the company | 85% |
| Abriox | Named by the company | 85% |
| Gen-Tracker | Named by the company | 85% |
| Elecsys | Named by the company | 85% |
| American Innovations | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Acorn Energy 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.
Acorn Energy 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 |
|---|---|
| Acorn Energy Inc | PG 93.53 % |
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).
