🔍 Read the full analysis: 52 Companies’ Humanoid Robot Mentions: What The SEC Filings Reveal on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get smart everyday buys delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
A review of SEC EDGAR filings found 52 companies mentioned “humanoid” in 163 filings from Jan. 1 through Nov. 1, 2026, compared with 17 companies in all of 2025 and six in 2024. The count includes robot makers, suppliers, customers and blank-check companies; a filing mention alone does not establish a commercial deployment or revenue stream.
A review of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings found 52 companies mentioned humanoid robots between Jan. 1 and Nov. 1, 2026, across 163 filings, a sharp rise from 17 companies in all of 2025 and six in 2024. The count tracks growing use of the term in corporate disclosures, but the filings describe very different levels of involvement, from robot makers to suppliers and companies citing a possible market.
The review, published by ThorstenMeyerAI.com on Nov. 2, says it searched the SEC’s EDGAR full-text database for the word “humanoid” in 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K and S-1 filings, including amendments and exhibits. It counted each SEC registrant once and each filing accession number once. The search returned 186 matching documents contained in 163 filings. Faraday Future accounted for 35 filings, according to the review.
The figures are the author’s own count, not an SEC tally. Inc. had reported 47 companies in a Nov. 1 column; ThorstenMeyerAI.com said differences in forms and the search window likely explain the gap. Its broader search term also matters: searching only the exact phrase “humanoid robot” found 18 companies, because that query does not capture all variations of the word.
After reading the contexts of the mentions, the review classified nine companies as building, selling or owning a humanoid maker; 31 as suppliers, customers or companies citing the market; six as blank-check firms; and six as incidental mentions. Those groupings are the author’s interpretation of the filings, rather than categories assigned by the companies or regulators.
Infographic 01 · The word is spreading
52 companies said “humanoid” in SEC filings this year
We ran the search ourselves: three times as many companies as in all of 2025, and almost nine times as many as in 2024.
Companies mentioning “humanoid”
10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, S-1 incl. amendments and exhibits, by filing year (2026: to 1 Nov)
The blockchain wave
Companies mentioning “blockchain” in the same forms
Mentions did not fall after the 2018 crypto crash. A rising count alone is not a bubble signal; the gap between words and business is.
How we counted
- Query: humanoid (catches “robot”, “robots”, “robotics”). The exact phrase “humanoid robot” alone: 18 companies.
- Forms: 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, S-1, each with amendments; every matching document, including exhibits.
- Period: filing dates 1 Jan to 1 Nov 2026; earlier years by calendar year.
- Counting: one company per SEC registrant number (CIK). Faraday Future alone: 35 of 163 filings.
- Inc. reported 47 companies. Likely a different form set or date window; same direction.
Source: SEC EDGAR full-text search, run 2 Nov 2026 (an all-forms search finds 272 entities, mostly investment funds listing humanoid-robotics ETFs; excluded). Tip: Inc., 1 Nov 2026.
Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
What the Filing Count Can Show
The rising count shows that humanoid robotics has become a more common subject in public-company disclosures. That can help readers identify businesses presenting the sector as a growth opportunity, and distinguish direct participation from references to potential customers or markets. It does not establish that the companies have deployed robots at scale, secured substantial orders or generated meaningful revenue from them.
The distinction matters because SEC filings combine legally required disclosures with varied material, including current reports and exhibits that may contain investor presentations or press releases. A supplier naming humanoids as a possible end market is not equivalent to a manufacturer reporting deliveries. The review’s own examples underscore the gap between market language and operating evidence.
It also cautions against treating a surge in mentions as a standalone indicator of corporate performance. The source notes earlier waves of companies attaching themselves to dot-com and blockchain themes, as well as SEC actions related to misleading claims about artificial intelligence. Those examples provide historical context, but they do not show that the current group is misleading investors or that humanoid robotics will follow the same path.
Popular right now
Dyson Ball Animal 3 Upright Vacuum
Dyson Airwrap i.d. Multi-Styler for Straight and Wavy Hair
Ninja CREAMi 7-in-1 Ice Cream Maker, NC301
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the 2026 Search Was Built
The search covered filings dated Jan. 1 through Nov. 1, 2026, using 10-K annual reports, 10-Q quarterly reports, 8-K current reports and S-1 registration statements. It included amendments and exhibits and compared the same form types with earlier years. Searching all SEC form types yielded 272 entities, the article says, largely because investment funds’ holdings lists also matched the term; those entities were excluded from the 52-company count.
The source identifies several examples of differing involvement. It says Tesla reported that Optimus production had begun in Fremont but provided no unit figures. Mobileye bought humanoid startup Mentee Robotics for $637 million, while its parent, Intel, reported the deal. Six blank-check companies appeared in the review, including Churchill Capital Corp XI, which is merging with Agility Robotics; the article says some other shells were seeking acquisitions in humanoids or physical AI.
The review also points to operating and commercial details alongside the broader language. Agility Robotics reports nine customer facilities and 65,000 hours of operation, according to the source. It says Faraday Future’s robot business recorded $853,000 in second-quarter robotics revenue from humanoids and four-legged robots combined. The article contrasts that figure with a prospectus from the company that bought the business, which it says listed two paid orders worth about $5,000 for a robot-sharing platform seven weeks earlier. These are company-reported figures as presented by the source.
“A word in a filing is not a robot in a warehouse.”
— ThorstenMeyerAI.com review
What Mentions Do Not Establish
The review does not provide a standardized measure of how much revenue or business activity each of the 52 companies derives from humanoid robotics. Nor does a keyword search reveal whether every mention reflects a current project, a forecast, a risk disclosure or a passing reference. The author’s categories offer a reading of the text, but other analysts could classify some companies differently.
Several reported commercial details also leave open questions. The source says Tesla disclosed the start of Optimus production but gave no unit count. It does not establish the scale or terms of all customer deployments, nor whether the cited revenue and orders will grow. A filing’s inclusion of a business plan or market opportunity is not evidence that projections will be met.
The count is limited to the stated forms, dates and search term. It should not be read as a complete census of every company involved in humanoid robotics or as a measure of the sector’s overall size. The source describes its figures as a review of public documents, not an assessment of any stock.
What Future Filings May Clarify
Subsequent quarterly and annual filings can show whether companies move from broad market references to disclosed customers, orders, production figures and revenue. For firms already reporting deployments, updates on operating hours and the number of facilities may offer more concrete evidence than additional mentions of the technology.
The count may also change as new filings arrive or as researchers apply different search terms and form types. Readers comparing future totals should check the filing window, forms included, treatment of amendments and whether the count refers to companies, documents or individual mentions. Those choices affect the result.
Key Questions
How many companies mentioned humanoid robots in the review?
The review counted 52 companies in SEC filings dated Jan. 1-Nov. 1, 2026. It found 17 companies in all of 2025 and six in 2024 using its stated search method.
How did the review count the companies?
It searched SEC EDGAR for “humanoid” in 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K and S-1 filings, including amendments and exhibits. Companies were counted by SEC registrant number, and filings by accession number.
Does a filing mention mean a company makes humanoid robots?
No. The review classified only nine of the 52 as building, selling or owning a humanoid maker. It grouped 31 as suppliers, customers or companies citing the market, and also found blank-check and incidental mentions.
Why did this count differ from Inc.’s reported 47?
ThorstenMeyerAI.com said differences in the form types searched and the date window likely account for the gap. Its 52-company figure came from its own search of filings through Nov. 1, 2026.
Does the increase prove the industry is growing?
The count shows more companies used the term in the filings covered by this search. By itself, it does not measure sales, deployments, production or the size of the humanoid-robotics industry.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
