Regional and supply-chain research

Casting Equipment Lost Foam Die Casting Keyword Candidate Study

Casting Equipment Lost Foam Die Casting Keyword Candidate Study. A dated 112-record cohort study compares composition, parent sets and evidence coverage. Comparative structure study; archive date 2026-10-16.

Revision and archive snapshot: 2026-10-16

Swipe tables sideways to see all columns.

Research findings

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Jiangsu, contains 18 records (16.1% of this 112-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 94 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded chain role label Advanced equipment and industrial automation / Process equipment and inspection instruments accounts for 93.8% here (105/112), compared with 21.2% in the parent set (4,085/19,297), an absolute gap of 72.6 percentage points.

51/112 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (45.5% of the cohort). The other 61 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

7 keyword candidates match only a company name, with no matching term in recorded products or sub-industry fields. Product evidence is needed before treating these as operating businesses in this segment.

Company cohortDirectly linked pagesShare of public archiveArchive date
1121120.6%2026-10-16

An ID-deduplicated archive snapshot, not the whole market, current recognition or operating results.

Comparable sets and compositional differences

The parent set, All public archive records, contains 19,297 records. This cohort contributes 112 (0.6%); 19,185 records remain after excluding it.

CategoryCohort count/baseReference: All public archive recordsGap (pp)Representation ratioRest count/base
chain role · Advanced equipment and industrial automation / Process equipment and inspection instruments105/112 · 93.8%4,085/19,297 · 21.2%+72.64.433,980/19,185
industry · Advanced equipment108/112 · 96.4%4,918/19,297 · 25.5%+70.93.784,810/19,185
sub-industry · Precision manufacturing7/112 · 6.2%303/19,297 · 1.6%+4.73.98296/19,185
reporting jurisdiction · Ningbo7/112 · 6.2%410/19,297 · 2.1%+4.12.94403/19,185
reporting jurisdiction · Qingdao6/112 · 5.4%259/19,297 · 1.3%+4.03.99253/19,185
reporting jurisdiction · Fujian6/112 · 5.4%279/19,297 · 1.4%+3.93.71273/19,185
reporting jurisdiction · Chongqing6/112 · 5.4%391/19,297 · 2.0%+3.32.64385/19,185
sub-industry · Instrumentation and testing equipment5/112 · 4.5%719/19,297 · 3.7%+0.71.20714/19,185

Ratio of label participation, not market share; multi-label counts overlap.

Excluding this cohort, the recorded chain role label Advanced equipment and industrial automation / Process equipment and inspection instruments covers 3,980/19,185 remaining records (20.7%), an absolute gap of 73.0 percentage points from this cohort.

Concentration and cross-sectional structure

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 26 labels; the top 3 contain 37/112 records (33.0%).Other known labels contain 75 records.

For 112 records with known labels, the effective category count is 14.9, versus 26 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 16 others are included in the calculations above.

Recorded labelRecordsShare of cohort
Jiangsu1816.1%
Zhejiang119.8%
Shandong87.1%
Ningbo76.2%
Anhui65.4%
Hebei65.4%
Fujian65.4%
Chongqing65.4%
Qingdao65.4%
Henan54.5%

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Jiangsu × Advanced equipment, contains 18 records, or 100.0% of the 18 records carrying the Jiangsu label.

reporting jurisdictionindustryIntersection recordsCohort share
JiangsuAdvanced equipment1816.1%
ZhejiangAdvanced equipment108.9%
ShandongAdvanced equipment87.1%
NingboAdvanced equipment65.4%
AnhuiAdvanced equipment65.4%
HebeiAdvanced equipment65.4%
FujianAdvanced equipment65.4%
ChongqingAdvanced equipment65.4%

A cell contains company IDs carrying both labels. It does not establish procurement, supply or investment relationships between firms. Multi-label cells may overlap.

This page displays 8 of the full cross-tab’s 30 non-empty cells; the other 22 remain in the analysis.

Evidence coverage and strength of conclusions

Record fieldNon-empty/cohortCompletion
Company name112/112100.0%
reporting jurisdiction112/112100.0%
industry112/112100.0%
Recorded products112/112100.0%
sub-industry112/112100.0%
Chain labels112/112100.0%

Non-empty fields are not necessarily accurate or supported by originals.

Scope of source supportCount
Profiles with source-supported excerpts51
Distinct corresponding companies51
Reviewed Chinese/English paragraph pairs51

Counts concern existing reviewed bilingual excerpts, not re-certification of originals or entire reports.

Transparent rule reminderRecordsCohort share
Contains registration-narrative wording10.9%
Only generic operations vocabulary remains43.6%
Non-empty text shorter than five characters10.9%

A rule hit prioritises review; it does not establish that the entire field is wrong. One record can trigger several rules.

Matched fieldCandidatesCohort share
Company name87.1%
Recorded products1816.1%
Sub-industry9080.4%

An ID may match several fields, so counts may exceed the cohort total. Matches establish search relevance only.

Among the translated non-broad query terms, “precision casting” has the most matches: 107/112. Name, product and sub-industry fields match 7, 11 and 90 records respectively; the largest field is sub-industry label. Fields can overlap, and a term remains a search link rather than verified business activity.

Selected query termCandidates/shareName matchesProduct fieldSub-industry
precision casting107 · 95.5%71190

Selected broad terms and specific segment terms, not the full query. Terms and fields can overlap and must not be summed. Counts show lexical sensitivity; no records are removed without primary evidence.

7 candidates match only a name, or lose all product-field matches after the full company name is removed while sub-industry also has no hit. This transparent string test locates copied company descriptions; it does not establish that a company does not operate the business.

Intersection with 2026 local lists

29 of this cohort’s 112 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (25.9%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

Observation setList recordsNew-applicant recordsReview recordsMapped company IDs
National list records linked to this cohort’s IDs2902929

List rows and company IDs are separate counts, not new firms or final recognition.

Stored 2026 local-recommendation records, sources and stage definitions

Recorded roles and delivery checks

Delivery framework, stages and original sources

Related studies and shared records

Shared records with Precision Casting Investment Casting Keyword Candidate Study: 111; records in this cohort but outside that set: 1. The intersection/union ratio is 49.8%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Precision Casting Forging Heat Treatment Keyword Candidate Study: 107; records in this cohort but outside that set: 5. The intersection/union ratio is 43.9%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Company samples and record links

CompanyJurisdictionRecorded industry
Hangzhou Kaimei Mold Co., Ltd.ZhejiangAdvanced equipment
Anhui Lianmeng MOULD Industrial Co., Ltd.AnhuiAdvanced equipment
Ninghai FIRST-RATE Injection MOULD Co., Ltd.NingboAdvanced equipment
Chongqing Chiheng Mold Co., Ltd.ChongqingAdvanced equipment
Anqing Niuli Mould Co., Ltd.AnhuiAdvanced equipment
Shandong Huaxin Electric Furnace Co., Ltd.ShandongAdvanced equipment
Suzhou Sanji Foundry Equipment Co., Ltd.JiangsuAdvanced equipment
Hangzhou Qianjin Forging Co., Ltd.ZhejiangAdvanced equipment

Stable-ID samples, not rankings; metrics use the full cohort.

Directly related profiles and reports

Methodology

Read ID deduplication, comparison, batch and evidence definitions