🔍 Read the full analysis: Humanoid Robots In Corporate Filings: Lessons From 52 Companies on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get the latest gadgets 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 by ThorstenMeyerAI.com counted 52 companies across 163 SEC filings that used the term “humanoid” from Jan. 1 through Nov. 1, 2026. The count indicates growing attention, not 52 companies building or deploying robots: the source classifies only nine as building, selling or owning a humanoid maker, while many cite suppliers, customers or the market.
ThorstenMeyerAI.com said on Nov. 2 that it found 52 companies mentioning “humanoid” in 163 SEC filings submitted from Jan. 1 through Nov. 1, 2026. The count points to a sharp rise in corporate references to humanoid robots, but the review says those mentions do not mean every company is making or using them: only nine of the 52 were classified as building, selling or owning a humanoid maker.
The outlet said it searched the SEC’s EDGAR full-text database for “humanoid” in 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K and S-1 filings, including amendments and exhibits. It counted one company per SEC registrant number and one filing per accession number. The search returned 186 matching documents across 163 filings; Faraday Future accounted for 35 filings, according to the review.
For comparison, the same search method found 17 companies in 2025 and six in 2024, the outlet reported. It said its count differs from an Inc. column published Nov. 1, which reported 47 companies; differences in covered forms and date range are a likely explanation, according to ThorstenMeyerAI.com. A search for the exact phrase “humanoid robot” returned 18 companies in 2026, the source said, because it does not capture all variations of the term.
After reading the filing passages, the outlet classified 31 companies as suppliers, customers or market references, six as blank-check companies, and six as incidental mentions, such as a director’s biography. Its nine-company category included firms it said build, sell or own a humanoid maker. These are the publisher’s classifications, not SEC findings. The source also said an all-form search returned 272 entities, largely because investment funds’ holdings lists included humanoid-robotics exchange-traded funds; those entities were excluded from its main count.
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
A Filing Mention Is Not a Deployment
The distinction matters because a filing can mention humanoids without showing that the company has a robot product, customer revenue or a working deployment. A supplier naming humanoids as a possible market is different from a robot maker reporting shipments, and both differ from a blank-check company seeking a future acquisition. Treating every mention as evidence of an operating business would overstate what the count establishes.
There are concrete signals among the references, according to the review. It said Vishay Precision disclosed a “vendor nomination letter from our initial humanoid robotics customer,” which points to a specific commercial step, although the source did not establish the resulting revenue. It also cited Agility Robotics as reporting nine customer facilities and 65,000 hours of operation. Those figures are company-reported operating data, not evidence that the wider group of 52 has similar activity.
The review’s examples also show why financial details matter. It said Faraday Future reported $853,000 in second-quarter robotics revenue, combining humanoids and four-legged robots. The company that bought its robot business expects more than 1,100 cumulative shipments, while a prospectus published seven weeks earlier described two paid orders totaling about $5,000 for a robot-sharing platform. The source presents these as different statements about the business; the shipment expectation is not the same as completed sales.
Products Worth Considering
Logitech MX Brio Ultra HD 4K Webcam, Graphite
Amazon Kindle Scribe Colorsoft, 64GB, 11-Inch Color Display with Premium Pen
Bose QuietComfort True Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the 2026 Count Was Built
The immediate prompt for the count was an Inc. column published Nov. 1 with the headline “47 Companies Are Mentioning Humanoid Robots in SEC Filings. History Says That’s a Red Flag.” ThorstenMeyerAI.com said the column prompted it to run its own search; it did not use the Inc. figure as the basis for its result. The outlet published its methodology alongside the count on Nov. 2.
Its search included filings dated Jan. 1 to Nov. 1, 2026, and compared those with the same filing types in earlier calendar years. Since 8-K exhibits can include press releases and investor presentations, a match may appear in material attached to a filing as well as in a company’s main discussion. The publisher says it read the surrounding passages and assigned each company to a category based on its strongest use of the term.
The source also cited past waves of corporate promotion around dot-com names and blockchain, as well as SEC cases involving “AI washing” in 2024 and 2025, including a case concerning a startup that promised a humanoid home robot. These are cautionary examples, not proof that current humanoid-related disclosures are misleading. The review notes that real deployments exist, while emphasizing that examples and scale vary.
“A word in a filing is not a robot in a warehouse.”
— ThorstenMeyerAI.com
What the Counts Cannot Establish
The count does not establish how many robots have been built, delivered or put into routine commercial use by the 52 companies. It also does not measure revenue attributable specifically to humanoids across the group. The source’s categories reflect its own reading of filings, and the filings may describe plans, possible markets, customer activity or business already underway.
Some details cited in the review are expectations rather than completed outcomes. The acquiring company’s forecast of more than 1,100 cumulative shipments is not a confirmed shipment total. The source does not provide enough information to compare the companies’ forecasts on a consistent basis, and its count does not assess whether the companies’ stated strategies will succeed.
The source material does not include the underlying list of all 52 companies or full excerpts from every filing. It also does not provide a company-by-company breakdown of humanoid-related revenue. Accordingly, the total is best read as a count of SEC registrants with a matching filing under the described method, not as a census of manufacturers, customers or deployed robots.
Follow the Filings and Shipments
The next useful evidence will come from future filings that report completed commercial milestones: paid orders, shipments, revenue, customer facilities and operating hours. Those measures can help distinguish companies with active products or customer relationships from firms that mention humanoids as a potential market or acquisition target.
ThorstenMeyerAI.com said its search could be repeated using EDGAR and the filing types, date range and term it described. The count is time-bound through Nov. 1, 2026; additional filings after that date are not included. No later count or company-by-company update was provided in the supplied material.
Key Questions
What did the 2026 review find?
ThorstenMeyerAI.com reported 52 companies and 163 filings containing “humanoid” in selected SEC filing types dated Jan. 1 through Nov. 1, 2026. Its search returned 186 matching documents.
Does the count mean 52 companies make humanoid robots?
No. The outlet classified only nine companies as building, selling or owning a humanoid maker. It classified the others as suppliers, customers or market references, blank-check companies, or incidental mentions.
Why is the count different from Inc.’s figure?
Inc. reported 47 companies in a Nov. 1 column. ThorstenMeyerAI.com said differing filing types and date windows likely explain the gap. The source conducted its own EDGAR search and did not use the Inc. count as its underlying data.
What evidence of real-world activity did the review cite?
The source said Agility Robotics reported nine customer facilities and 65,000 hours of operation. It also cited a supplier’s vendor nomination letter and Faraday Future’s reported second-quarter robotics revenue, which combined humanoid and four-legged robots.
What should readers look for in future filings?
Look for clearly reported completed shipments, paid orders, customer deployments and humanoid-specific revenue. A forecast, a potential market reference or a mention in an attached presentation does not by itself confirm commercial scale.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
