Cables and conductors / New energy and power equipment / Complete systems and use-case applications Sub-industry and Supply-chain Study

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Jiangsu, contains 22 records (20.0% of this 110-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 88 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded industry label New energy and power equipment accounts for 92.7% here (102/110), compared with 34.1% in the parent set (601/1,763), an absolute gap of 58.6 percentage points.

44/110 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (40.0% of the cohort). The other 66 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

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

The parent set, New energy and power equipment / Complete systems and use-case applications, contains 1,763 records. This cohort contributes 110 (6.2%); 1,653 records remain after excluding it.

The parent set, Cables and conductors, contains 115 records. This cohort contributes 110 (95.7%); 5 records remain after excluding it.

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

Excluding this cohort, the recorded industry label New energy and power equipment covers 499/1,653 remaining records (30.2%), an absolute gap of 62.5 percentage points from this cohort.

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 25 labels; the top 3 contain 44/110 records (40.0%).Other known labels contain 66 records.

For 110 records with known labels, the effective category count is 11.6, versus 25 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 15 others are included in the calculations above.

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Jiangsu × New energy and power equipment, contains 17 records, or 77.3% of the 22 records carrying the Jiangsu label.

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.

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

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

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

20 of this cohort’s 110 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (18.2%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

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

Shared records with Wire Cable Optical Cable Keyword Candidate Study: 110; records in this cohort but outside that set: 0. The intersection/union ratio is 34.3%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Nuclear Aerospace Special Cable Keyword Candidate Study: 31; records in this cohort but outside that set: 79. The intersection/union ratio is 20.5%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

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