資料中心電源市場按組件類型、層級類型、資料中心類型和行業垂直分類 - 全球預測 2025-2032

預計到 2032 年資料中心電源市場將成長至 379.2 億美元，複合年成長率為 8.95%。

它為現代資料中心的電力優先順序提供了權威指南，並闡明了為什麼電力策略決定了設施的性能、成本和永續性結果。

引言部分闡述了穩健、高效且具韌性的電力基礎設施對於現代數位化設施至關重要。如今，資料中心正處於運算能力呈指數級成長、脫碳監管壓力以及對不間斷服務日益成長的期望的關鍵交匯點。因此，設施所有者、營運商及其供應鏈必須在資本強度、營運可靠性和環境績效之間進行複雜的權衡。

在此背景下，電力系統不再只是輔助設施，而是成為影響選址、架構和長期總擁有成本的策略性資產。除了傳統的UPS架構和配電設備外，能源效率措施和分散式發電方案也擴大被納入考慮。同時，向邊緣部署的轉變以及超大規模園區的專業化發展，要求採用差異化設計，並優先考慮模組化和可維護性。

此外，諸如機架密度提升、人工智慧主導的工作負載以及先進的冷卻解決方案等技術趨勢正在改變負載曲線，並要求更精細的電源監控和管理。因此，採購週期和工程標準必須隨之調整，以實現更快的部署計畫和更高的生命週期靈活性。本介紹將為深入分析市場格局、動態、競爭考察、區域差異、競爭模式和建議行動奠定基礎，其中包括：

密集化、永續性要求、供應鏈多樣化和數位化營運如何重新定義資料中心電力基礎設施和策略重點

在技​​術、經濟和監管條件融合的推動下，我們正在見證變革時期，它正在重塑資料中心的電力傳輸、計量和管理方式。首先，不斷成長的運算強度，尤其是來自人工智慧訓練和推理工作負載的運算強度，正在將電力需求集中到密度越來越高的叢集中，迫使設計人員重新評估配電拓撲和冷卻耦合策略。因此，曾經足以滿足平均機架密度的系統現在需要升級到母線槽系統、更高容量的配電單元 (PDU) 以及改進的電源監控解決方案。

其次，永續性要求和企業淨零排放承諾正在加速自發電、混合能源來源和先進能源管理平台的採用。這種轉變迫使營運商整合可再生能源發電、電池儲能和智慧控制系統，以平衡可靠性和排放。第三，供應鏈多元化和地緣政治摩擦正在推動向更長的前置作業時間和關鍵零件的在地採購轉變，從而刺激了對供應商資格確認、設計模組化和標準化介面的投資，以降低中斷風險。

第四，透過遙測、預測分析和自動化控制實現電力營運數位化，可以實現更主動的容量規劃和故障隔離。隨著營運商採用這些功能，他們可以提高可用性，同時消除營運中的運轉率。最後，不斷變化的法規環境和收費系統為採購和營運模式帶來了新的複雜性。總而言之，這些轉變正在將電力從後端公用事業轉變為決定競爭力和韌性的戰略樞紐。

評估美國近期關稅對 2025 年電力基礎設施採購複雜性、供應商策略和部署計畫的分層影響

美國近期關稅措施的累積效應將持續到2025年，從而改變電力設備和服務的採購計算、供應商關係以及部署順序。關稅不僅增加了電氣元件、電力電子設備和重型設備的進口成本，還放大了發電機、配電單元 (PDU)、不間斷電源 (UPS) 系統和輔助開關設備等解決方案的直接成本。這迫使採購團隊重新評估籌資策略，權衡更高的進口元件成本和加快本地供應商發展帶來的單位成本上升之間的利弊。

此外，關稅也會產生副作用，延長供應鏈時間，因為企業需要重新評估供應商並重新配置物流以避免關稅的影響。這些延遲效應凸顯了早期供應商參與、允許零件替換的模組化設計以及更明確分配進度風險的合約的重要性。同時，關稅主導的價格波動正在刺激一些企業投資國內製造產能，並尋求有利於現成模組化組件和標準化母線槽方案的材料清單方法。

重要的是，電價與更廣泛的政策工具相互作用，例如對國內清潔能源和彈性投資的獎勵。因此，營運商和整合商正在將政策情境納入採購決策，優先考慮採購工具的靈活性，並採用分階段交付模式。這些機制使組織能夠管理電價變化的累積影響，同時保護運作和資本規劃。

詳細的細分揭示了組件選擇、層級期望、設施類型和行業特定的合規性如何影響差異化的電力系統決策和採購行為

細分洞察揭示了元件選擇、預期層級、資料中心類型和產業需求如何相互作用，從而定義電力系統優先順序和購買行為。根據組件類型，相關人員區分服務和解決方案。服務著重於設計和諮詢、整合和部署以及支援和維護，而解決方案則包括母線槽系統、配電單元 (PDU)、發電機、電力監控和管理設備以及不斷電系統。優先考慮託管服務的設施通常會選擇涵蓋快速部署和預防性保養的生命週期契約，而以解決方案為中心的設施則會投資更高規格的母線槽和 UPS 技術，以滿足其更密集的計算空間需求。

目錄

第1章：前言

第2章調查方法

第3章執行摘要

第4章 市場概況

第5章 市場洞察

• 引入液體冷卻系統來解決超大規模資料中心日益增加的機架密度
• 可再生現場能源微電網，以減少資料中心的碳排放和能源成本。
• 推出用於動態工作負載和能源最佳化的人工智慧驅動電源管理平台
• 實作模組化預製資料中心單元，實現快速站點容量擴展
• 增加對燃料電池備用電源解決方案的投資，以永續的高可用性營運
• 利用直流 (DC) 配電架構提高資料中心能源效率
• 擴展邊緣基礎設施以支援超低延遲 5G 和物聯網應用

第6章：2025年美國關稅的累積影響

第7章：人工智慧的累積影響，2025年

第 8 章：資料中心電源市場（按組件類型）

• 服務
  • 設計與諮詢
  • 整合與部署
  • 支援和維護
• 解決方案
  • 公車專用道系統
  • 電源分配單元（PDU）
  • 發電機
  • 電力監控管理設備
  • 不斷電系統（UPS）

第 9 章：資料中心電源市場（依層級類型）

• 第 1 層
• 第 2 層
• 第 3 層
• 第 4 層

第 10 章：資料中心電源市場（按資料中心類型）

• 主機代管資料中心
• 邊緣資料中心
• 企業資料中心
• 超大規模資料中心

第 11 章資料中心電源市場（按行業垂直分類）

• 銀行、金融服務和保險（BFSI）
• 政府和國防
• 衛生保健
• 資訊科技/通訊
• 製造業
• 媒體與娛樂
• 零售

第 12 章：資料中心電源市場（按地區）

• 美洲
  • 北美洲
  • 拉丁美洲
• 歐洲、中東和非洲
  • 歐洲
  • 中東
  • 非洲
• 亞太地區

第 13 章：資料中心電源市場（按類別）

• ASEAN
• GCC
• EU
• BRICS
• G7
• NATO

第 14 章：按國家分類的資料中心電源市場

• 美國
• 加拿大
• 墨西哥
• 巴西
• 英國
• 德國
• 法國
• 俄羅斯
• 義大利
• 西班牙
• 中國
• 印度
• 日本
• 澳洲
• 韓國

第15章競爭格局

• 2024年市佔率分析
• 2024年FPNV定位矩陣
• 競爭分析
  • ABB Ltd.
  • Active Power Solutions Ltd.
  • AEG Power Solutions BV
  • Black Box Corporation
  • Caterpillar Inc.
  • Control Technology Co.
  • Cummins Inc.
  • Cyber Power Systems Inc.
  • Danfoss AS
  • Delta Electronics, Inc.
  • Eaton Corporation
  • Exide Technologies
  • Generac Power Systems, Inc.
  • General Electric Company
  • Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
  • Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
  • Legrand SA
  • Panduit Corp. by Vigilent Corporation
  • Rittal GmbH & Co. KG
  • Rolls Royce Holdings Plc
  • Schneider Electric SE
  • Siemens AG
  • Toshiba Corp.
  • Vertiv Holdings Co.

The Data Center Power Market is projected to grow by USD 37.92 billion at a CAGR of 8.95% by 2032.

A definitive orientation to contemporary data center power priorities clarifying why power strategy now defines facility performance, cost, and sustainability outcomes

The introduction frames the evolving imperative for robust, efficient, and resilient power infrastructure within modern digital facilities. Data centers now occupy a critical position at the intersection of exponential compute growth, regulatory pressure to decarbonize, and rising expectations for uninterrupted service. Consequently, facility owners, operators, and their supply chains must navigate a complex set of trade-offs among capital intensity, operational reliability, and environmental performance.

Against this backdrop, power systems are no longer ancillary utilities but strategic assets that influence site selection, architecture, and long-term total cost of ownership. Energy efficiency measures and distributed generation options increasingly sit alongside traditional UPS architectures and power distribution equipment. In parallel, the shift toward edge deployments and the specialization of hyperscale campuses demand differentiated designs that prioritize modularity and serviceability.

Moreover, technology trends such as higher-density racks, AI-driven workloads, and advanced cooling solutions alter load profiles and demand more granular power monitoring and management. As a result, procurement cycles and engineering standards must adapt to deliver faster deployment timelines and improved lifecycle flexibility. This introduction sets the stage for a deeper analysis of the landscape changes, tariff dynamics, segmentation insights, regional variations, competitive patterns, and recommended actions that follow

How densification, sustainability mandates, supply chain diversification, and digital operations are redefining data center power infrastructure and strategic priorities

The landscape is undergoing transformative shifts driven by converging technical, economic, and regulatory forces that together reshape how power is delivered, measured, and managed in data centers. First, rising compute intensity-particularly from AI training and inference workloads-has concentrated power demand into ever-denser clusters, which forces designers to re-evaluate power distribution topologies and cooling coupling strategies. Consequently, systems that once sufficed for average rack densities require upgrades to busway systems, higher-capacity PDUs, and improved power monitoring solutions.

Second, sustainability mandates and corporate net-zero commitments have accelerated the adoption of onsite generation, hybridized energy sources, and advanced energy management platforms. This transition compels operators to integrate renewable generation, battery storage, and intelligent control systems to balance reliability with emissions reduction. Third, supply chain diversification and geopolitical friction are prompting longer lead times for critical components and a shift toward local sourcing, spurring investments in supplier qualification, design modularity, and standardized interfaces to mitigate disruption risks.

Fourth, digitalization of power operations via telemetry, predictive analytics, and automated controls enables more proactive capacity planning and fault isolation. As operators adopt these capabilities, they can squeeze inefficiencies from operations while improving uptime. Lastly, evolving regulatory environments and tariff constructs introduce new complexity to procurement and operating models. Taken together, these shifts move power from a backend utility to a strategic axis that determines competitiveness and resilience

Assessing the layered consequences of recent United States tariff actions through 2025 on procurement complexity, supplier strategies, and deployment timelines for power infrastructure

The cumulative effect of recent tariff actions in the United States through 2025 has altered procurement calculus, supplier relationships, and deployment sequencing for power equipment and services. Tariff measures that raise import costs for electrical components, power electronics, and heavy equipment have amplified the direct cost of solutions such as power generators, PDUs, UPS systems, and ancillary switchgear. In response, procurement teams must reassess sourcing strategies, weighing the trade-offs between elevated imported component costs and the higher unit costs of accelerating local supplier development.

Moreover, tariffs have had a secondary impact by elongating supply chain timelines as organizations requalify vendors and reconfigure logistics to avoid exposure. This delay effect increases the importance of early-stage supplier engagement, modular design that tolerates component substitution, and contracts that allocate schedule risk more explicitly. At the same time, tariff-driven price movement has incentivized some players to invest in domestic manufacturing capacity and to pursue alternative bill-of-materials approaches that favor off-the-shelf modular assemblies and standardized busway options.

Importantly, tariffs interact with broader policy levers such as incentives for domestic clean energy and resilience investments, which can mitigate cost impacts when aligned effectively. As a result, operators and integrators increasingly incorporate policy scenarios into sourcing decisions, prioritize flexibility in procurement vehicles, and adopt staged delivery models that allow core capacity to come online while noncritical elements follow. Through these mechanisms, organizations can manage the cumulative effects of tariff changes while protecting uptime and capital plans

Deep segmentation reveals how component choices, tier expectations, facility typologies, and industry-specific compliance shape differentiated power system decisions and procurement behaviors

Segmentation insights reveal how component choices, tier expectations, data center typologies, and industry requirements interact to define power system priorities and purchase behaviors. Based on Component Type, stakeholders differentiate between Services and Solutions; Services emphasize design & consulting, integration & deployment, and support & maintenance while Solutions encompass busway systems, power distribution units (PDUs), power generators, power monitoring and management equipment, and uninterruptible power supply systems. Facilities that prioritize managed Services often opt for lifecycle agreements that cover rapid deployment and preventive maintenance, whereas those focusing on Solutions invest in higher-specification busway and UPS technologies to meet dense compute footprints.

Based on Tier Type, variations across Tier 1 through Tier 4 inform redundancy planning, fault tolerance requirements, and the degree of concurrent maintainability demanded. Higher-tier facilities typically specify more robust UPS topologies, multiple independent feed paths, and enhanced monitoring to minimize single points of failure. Based on Data Center Type, the contrast between colocation data centers, edge data centers, enterprise data centers, and hyperscale data centers drives divergent procurement lead times and modularity preferences; edge sites prioritize compact, quickly commissioned power packages while hyperscale campuses emphasize scalable busway, centralized generators, and sophisticated energy management systems.

Based on Industry Vertical, the spectrum from banking, financial services, and insurance through government & defense, healthcare, IT & telecommunication, manufacturing, media & entertainment, and retail dictates varying service-level expectations and compliance regimes. Regulated verticals tend toward conservative architectures with extensive redundancy and auditability, while digital-native operators may emphasize agility and telemetry-driven operations. Together, these segmentation lenses clarify where suppliers should position offerings and how operators can align technical specifications with commercial objectives

How divergent regional energy policies, grid characteristics, and supply chain ecosystems across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific drive localized power infrastructure strategies

Regional dynamics exert powerful influence over technology selection, regulatory compliance, and supply chain strategies across the Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, operators balance legacy grid reliability issues with rapid hyperscale growth, leading to a dual focus on resiliency-enhancing generators and scalable busway systems, along with increasing interest in hybrid renewable integration. Transitioning north-south energy policies also affect where capacity expansions occur and how energy contracts are structured, prompting operators to design flexible power infrastructures that can adapt to varying utility tariffs and incentive programs.

In Europe, Middle East & Africa, regulatory momentum on decarbonization, ambitious grid modernization efforts, and regional variations in grid stability shape investment toward digital power management and localized storage. The MENA region's climate and energy mix elevate cooling-coupled power strategies and favor robust generator deployments for mission-critical sites. Conversely, EMEA jurisdictions with aggressive emissions targets propel uptake of low-carbon onsite generation and tighter PUE objectives.

The Asia-Pacific region features a mix of high-growth hyperscale activity, dense urban edge deployments, and rapidly evolving regulatory frameworks. Supply chain concentration in APAC influences component availability and pricing, while regional industrial policy encourages capacity expansion and domestic manufacturing. Across all regions, operators must reconcile differing regulatory requirements, grid characteristics, and supplier ecosystems to design resilient, cost-effective power infrastructures that align with local business priorities

Competitive landscape dynamics driven by incumbents, integrators, and software-first entrants that accelerate digitization, regional manufacturing, and bundled lifecycle services

Competitive dynamics in the data center power ecosystem reflect a balance between legacy equipment manufacturers, specialized integrators, and emerging technology entrants that focus on software-enabled energy management. Established original equipment manufacturers continue to dominate in large-scale supply of UPS systems, generators, and PDUs due to deep engineering expertise and broad service networks. Nevertheless, integrators and design firms that package solutions with robust lifecycle support services capture substantial value by reducing complexity for end users and accelerating deployment schedules.

New entrants often differentiate through advanced monitoring platforms, power-electronics innovation, and modular prefabricated assemblies that enable rapid edge deployments and simpler scalability. These vendors force incumbents to accelerate digitization roadmaps and to offer interoperable control layers that unify legacy hardware with cloud-native telemetry and analytics. In addition, suppliers that invest in regional manufacturing footprints and parts inventories gain competitive advantage where tariff exposure and lead-time sensitivity are acute.

Strategic partnerships between OEMs, system integrators, and energy service companies are increasingly common, enabling bundled solutions that combine equipment, installation, and performance-based maintenance agreements. For buyers, the landscape rewards suppliers who provide transparent total lifecycle support, predictable service-level commitments, and well-documented interoperability standards that reduce integration risk and shorten commissioning timelines

Practical steps to strengthen resilience and optimize total lifecycle value through modular design, supplier diversification, advanced monitoring, and cross-functional procurement alignment

Actionable recommendations for leaders center on aligning power investments with evolving workload profiles, regulatory shifts, and supply chain realities to safeguard uptime while controlling costs. First, prioritize modular architectures that enable phased capacity expansion and component interchangeability; this reduces schedule risk and permits substitution when tariffs or lead times affect specific vendors. Second, elevate power monitoring and analytics to the core of operations so that predictive maintenance, capacity forecasting, and energy optimization can be managed proactively rather than reactively.

Third, adopt a supplier diversification strategy that balances long-term partnerships with strategic secondary suppliers, including regional manufacturers, to mitigate tariff exposure and shorten delivery windows. Fourth, incorporate policy scenario planning into procurement processes to capture incentives for clean energy and resilience investments while remaining prepared for tariff volatility. Fifth, build cross-functional playbooks that align procurement, engineering, and finance stakeholders on equipment specifications, spare parts strategy, and contingency plans to accelerate decision cycles and reduce project delays.

Finally, invest in skills and processes that support digital operations, such as automation of routine fault responses and remote commissioning capabilities, to reduce operational complexity across distributed sites. By implementing these steps, leaders can strengthen their resilience to external shocks, improve lifecycle economics, and extract more value from their power infrastructure investments

A methodology combining expert interviews, technical standards review, and supply chain diagnostics reinforced by scenario analysis to validate practical, risk-aware conclusions

The research methodology integrates qualitative expert interviews, technical literature synthesis, and granular supply chain diagnostics to ensure robust, actionable findings. Primary inputs include structured interviews with design engineers, procurement leaders, and operations managers across a representative set of data center operators, integrators, and equipment providers, allowing the study to capture real-world trade-offs in specification, deployment, and maintenance. Complementing these interviews, the methodology reviews technical standards, regulatory filings, and white papers that inform best practices for redundancy topologies, energy management, and resiliency testing.

In parallel, supply chain diagnostics map component sourcing patterns, lead-time trends, and manufacturing footprints to identify where tariff exposure and capacity constraints are most acute. This analysis leverages bill-of-material comparisons and procurement contract archetypes to highlight vulnerability points and mitigation strategies. Scenario analysis is employed to stress-test operational decisions against variables such as tariff shifts, regional grid performance, and accelerated compute density, which helps translate findings into practical risk management approaches.

Throughout, the research applies triangulation to validate conclusions, ensuring that qualitative insights align with observable procurement behaviors and documented technical specifications. Executive summaries and technical appendices provide traceable evidence for each major conclusion, enabling readers to interrogate assumptions and adapt recommendations to their unique operational circumstances

A final synthesis underscoring power infrastructure as a strategic platform that demands modularity, supplier diversity, and operational digitization to secure resilience and sustainability

In conclusion, power infrastructure now functions as a strategic differentiator for digital infrastructure operators rather than a background utility component. The convergence of densifying compute workloads, sustainability mandates, supply chain complexity, and tariff dynamics compels organizations to rethink procurement, design, and operational practices. Operators that adopt modular architectures, strengthen supplier diversity, and embed advanced monitoring will be better positioned to manage risk and accelerate deployment timelines while meeting resilience and environmental goals.

Furthermore, regional nuances in policy, grid stability, and manufacturing capacity require site-specific strategies that mesh corporate objectives with local realities. Organizations should therefore prioritize flexible design principles and contractual mechanisms that allow them to pivot in response to changing tariffs and supplier availability. Finally, aligning cross-functional teams around shared specifications and lifecycle objectives reduces friction and shortens time to service, enabling businesses to extract more predictable value from their power investments.

Taken together, these themes underscore the need for deliberate, forward-looking approaches to power strategy that treat infrastructure as a platform for operational excellence and sustainability. The recommendations and insights provided in this report aim to help decision-makers translate these imperatives into concrete actions that safeguard continuity, reduce complexity, and support long-term strategic goals

Table of Contents

1. Preface

• 1.1. Objectives of the Study
• 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
• 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
• 1.4. Currency & Pricing
• 1.5. Language
• 1.6. Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

3. Executive Summary

4. Market Overview

5. Market Insights

• 5.1. Adoption of liquid cooling systems to manage rising rack densities in hyperscale data centers
• 5.2. Integration of renewable on-site energy microgrids to reduce data center carbon footprint and energy costs
• 5.3. Deployment of AI-driven power management platforms for dynamic workload and energy optimization
• 5.4. Implementation of modular prefabricated data center units for rapid site capacity expansion
• 5.5. Increasing investment in fuel cell backup power solutions to achieve sustainable high-availability operations
• 5.6. Utilization of direct current (DC) power distribution architectures to improve data center energy efficiency
• 5.7. Expansion of edge data center power infrastructures to support ultra-low latency 5G and IoT applications

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Data Center Power Market, by Component Type

• 8.1. Services
  • 8.1.1. Design & Consulting
  • 8.1.2. Integration & Deployment
  • 8.1.3. Support & Maintenance
• 8.2. Solutions
  • 8.2.1. Busway Systems
  • 8.2.2. Power Distribution Units (PDUs)
  • 8.2.3. Power Generators
  • 8.2.4. Power Monitoring and Management Equipment
  • 8.2.5. Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)

9. Data Center Power Market, by Tier Type

• 9.1. Tier 1
• 9.2. Tier 2
• 9.3. Tier 3
• 9.4. Tier 4

10. Data Center Power Market, by Data Center Type

• 10.1. Colocation Data Centers
• 10.2. Edge Data Centers
• 10.3. Enterprise Data Centers
• 10.4. Hyperscale Data Centers

11. Data Center Power Market, by Industry Vertical

• 11.1. Banking, Financial Services, and Insurance (BFSI)
• 11.2. Government & Defense
• 11.3. Healthcare
• 11.4. IT & Telecommunication
• 11.5. Manufacturing
• 11.6. Media & Entertainment
• 11.7. Retail

12. Data Center Power Market, by Region

• 12.1. Americas
  • 12.1.1. North America
  • 12.1.2. Latin America
• 12.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
  • 12.2.1. Europe
  • 12.2.2. Middle East
  • 12.2.3. Africa
• 12.3. Asia-Pacific

13. Data Center Power Market, by Group

• 13.1. ASEAN
• 13.2. GCC
• 13.3. European Union
• 13.4. BRICS
• 13.5. G7
• 13.6. NATO

14. Data Center Power Market, by Country

• 14.1. United States
• 14.2. Canada
• 14.3. Mexico
• 14.4. Brazil
• 14.5. United Kingdom
• 14.6. Germany
• 14.7. France
• 14.8. Russia
• 14.9. Italy
• 14.10. Spain
• 14.11. China
• 14.12. India
• 14.13. Japan
• 14.14. Australia
• 14.15. South Korea

15. Competitive Landscape

• 15.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
• 15.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
• 15.3. Competitive Analysis
  • 15.3.1. ABB Ltd.
  • 15.3.2. Active Power Solutions Ltd.
  • 15.3.3. AEG Power Solutions BV
  • 15.3.4. Black Box Corporation
  • 15.3.5. Caterpillar Inc.
  • 15.3.6. Control Technology Co.
  • 15.3.7. Cummins Inc.
  • 15.3.8. Cyber Power Systems Inc.
  • 15.3.9. Danfoss AS
  • 15.3.10. Delta Electronics, Inc.
  • 15.3.11. Eaton Corporation
  • 15.3.12. Exide Technologies
  • 15.3.13. Generac Power Systems, Inc.
  • 15.3.14. General Electric Company
  • 15.3.15. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
  • 15.3.16. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
  • 15.3.17. Legrand S.A.
  • 15.3.18. Panduit Corp. by Vigilent Corporation
  • 15.3.19. Rittal GmbH & Co. KG
  • 15.3.20. Rolls Royce Holdings Plc
  • 15.3.21. Schneider Electric SE
  • 15.3.22. Siemens AG
  • 15.3.23. Toshiba Corp.
  • 15.3.24. Vertiv Holdings Co.