Cover Image
Market Research Report

Guidehouse Insights Leaderboard Report - Utility Field Area Networking: Assessment of Strategy and Execution for 13 Grid Edge Connectivity Providers

Published by Guidehouse Insights (formerly Navigant Research) Product code 384218
Published Content info 42 Pages; 19 Tables, Charts & Figures
Delivery time: 1-2 business days
Price
Back to Top
Guidehouse Insights Leaderboard Report - Utility Field Area Networking: Assessment of Strategy and Execution for 13 Grid Edge Connectivity Providers
Published: March 20, 2019 Content info: 42 Pages; 19 Tables, Charts & Figures
Description

The market for field area networks (FANs) in the electric utility vertical is crowded. Where utilities historically have relied on application-specific networks for silo-specific needs, power utilities increasingly understand that the Internet of Things covers a multitude of grid efficiency, reliability, safety, and optimization applications. These applications span the utility network, from generation, through transmission and distribution, all the way to the grid edge-or even behind the meter for home energy management and distributed generation integration.

These changing industry dynamics mean more utilities are exploring the concept of a holistic, territory-wide network for both FAN and wide area network needs. Technological advancements have led to the rise of more specialized narrowband wireless networking solutions and spectrum sharing schemes have also been proposed globally. The ways in which electric utilities may connect grid edge assets to distributed or centralized information technology applications have increased. Legacy FAN vendors, which may have historically focused on smart metering or specific distribution automation applications, have been busy expanding uses for grid edge connectivity.

This Navigant Research Leaderboard examines the strategy and execution of 13 leading utility FAN providers. These players are rated on 12 criteria: vision; go-to-market strategy; partners; production strategy; technology; geographic reach; sales, marketing, and distribution; product performance; product quality and reliability; product portfolio; pricing; and staying power. Using Navigant Research's proprietary Leaderboard methodology, vendors are profiled, rated, and ranked to provide an objective assessment of these companies' relative strengths and weaknesses in the global utility FAN market.

Top 10 Vendors

  • 1. Itron
  • 2. Aclara
  • 3. Trilliant
  • 4. ABB Wireless
  • 5. Landis+Gyr
  • 6. Nokia
  • 7. RAD
  • 8. MiMOMax Wireless
  • 9. S&C Electric
  • 10. Ericsson

Key Questions Addressed

  • Who are the leading utility field area networking vendors globally?
  • How are field area networking solutions and vendors differentiated in the market?
  • What are the key strengths and weaknesses of the leading field area networking vendors?
  • What strategic growth initiatives are emphasized by different field area networking vendors?
  • How does portfolio depth versus breadth affect each field area networking vendor's competitive position?

Who Needs This Report

  • Utility field area networking solution vendors
  • Utilities
  • Utility regulators
  • Grid IT and automation solution vendors
  • Utility regulators
  • Communications infrastructure vendors
  • Investor community
Table of Contents
Product Code: LB-UFAN-19

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary

  • 1.1 Market Introduction
  • 1.2 Vendor Selection
  • 1.3 The Navigant Research Leaderboard Grid

2. Market Overview

  • 2.1 Market Definition
  • 2.2 Market Trends and Drivers
  • 2.3 Market Outlook

3. The Navigant Research Leaderboard

  • 3.1 The Navigant Research Leaderboard Categories
    • 3.1.1 Leaders
    • 3.1.2 Contenders
    • 3.1.3 Challengers
    • 3.1.4 Followers
  • 3.2 The Navigant Research Leaderboard Grid

4. Company Rankings

  • 4.1 Leaders
    • 4.1.1 Itron
  • 4.2 Contenders
    • 4.2.1 Aclara
    • 4.2.2 Trilliant
    • 4.2.3 ABB Wireless
    • 4.2.4 andis+Gyr
    • 4.2.5 Nokia
    • 4.2.6 RAD
    • 4.2.7 MiMOMax Wireless
    • 4.2.8 S&C Electric
    • 4.2.9 Ericsson
    • 4.2.10 Honeywell
    • 4.2.11 Sensus
  • 4.3 Challengers
    • 4.3.1 Tantalus
  • 4.4 Followers

5. Acronym and Abbreviation List

6. Table of Contents

7. Table of Charts and Figures

8. Scope of Study and Methodology

  • 8.1 Scope of Study
  • 8.2 Sources and Methodology
    • 8.2.1 Vendor Selection
    • 8.2.2 Ratings Scale
      • 8.2.2.1 Score Calculations
    • 8.2.3 Criteria Definitions
      • 8.2.3.1 Strategy
      • 8.2.3.2 Execution

List of Charts and Figures

  • The Navigant Research Leaderboard Grid
  • The Navigant Research Leaderboard Grid
  • Itron Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Aclara Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Trilliant Wireless Strategy and Execution Scores
  • ABB Wireless Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Landis+Gyr Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Nokia Strategy and Execution Scores
  • RAD Electric Strategy and Execution Scores
  • MiMOMax Wireless Strategy and Execution Scores
  • S&C Electric Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Ericsson Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Honeywell Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Sensus Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Tantalus Systems Strategy and Execution Scores

List of Tables

  • The Navigant Research Leaderboard Overall Scores
  • Vendor Scores
  • Vendor Scores on Strategy Criteria
  • Vendor Scores on Execution Criteria

List of Charts and Figures

  • The Navigant Research Leaderboard Grid
  • Itron Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Silver Spring Networks Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Landis+Gyr Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Aclara Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Sensus Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Honeywell Strategy and Execution Scores
  • ABB Wireless Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Trilliant Strategy and Execution Scores
  • S&C Electric Strategy and Execution Scores
  • Tantalus Strategy and Execution Scores

List of Tables

  • The Navigant Research Leaderboard Overall Scores
  • Vendor Scores
  • Vendor Scores on Strategy Criteria
  • Vendor Scores on Execution Criteria
Back to Top