Philips – South African trademarks
Updated 8 November 2026
Philips is a Dutch health technology company. It makes medical systems and personal health products such as shavers and oral care.
How Philips has built and protected its brands in South Africa – its trademark portfolio, where it expanded, how quickly its marks are registered, and who it competes with.
Download report (PDF)Philips trademarks in 45 seconds
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/philips-south-african-trademarks/overview-video.html
A portfolio built over time
Philips filed its first South African trademark in 1939 and has filed 549 since; its busiest year was 2015, with 59 new filings. The chart shows its filings per year from 1970.
Trademarks by filing year, up to 2024; applications still pending are not included.
The names behind the portfolio
Over the years the group has filed under several names – earlier company names, holding companies and subsidiaries. We count them together.
| Name | Marks | Filing years |
|---|---|---|
| Philips | 582 | 1939–2024 |
| Koninklijke Philips Electronics | 145 | 1983–2013 |
Where Philips expanded its business
Trademark classes show what a business sells. Philips' portfolio is concentrated in electronics & software (class 9), medical devices (class 10), hand tools (class 8). Its most recent moves were into building materials (2024), restaurants & hotels (2016), vehicles (2013).
Philips trademarks: expansion into trademark classes, 1970–2024
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/philips-south-african-trademarks/class-expansion-video.html
Each tile is a class; it lights up when the group first files in it and darkens with more filings; the dots show how many of its closest rivals also file in that class. The chart compares the number of classes used with its rivals. The video runs from 1970; classes entered earlier are lit from the start.
| Class | Marks | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9 Electronics & software | 122 | 22.2% | 1949 |
| 10 Medical devices | 70 | 12.8% | 1939 |
| 8 Hand tools | 57 | 10.4% | 1939 |
| 11 Lighting & appliances | 54 | 9.8% | 1957 |
| 42 Tech & IT services | 31 | 5.6% | 1977 |
| 21 Kitchenware | 29 | 5.3% | 1949 |
| 44 Medical & beauty care | 25 | 4.6% | 2008 |
| 7 Machines | 20 | 3.6% | 1957 |
The brands Philips protects most
The word marks and logo names Philips has filed most often – the same brand filed in more classes, in more versions or again over the years.
| # | Brand | Trademarks | Classes | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PHILIPS | 100 | 27 | 1949–2024 |
| 2 | AVENT | 45 | 20 | 2013–2020 |
| 3 | UGROW | 27 | 15 | 2015–2016 |
| 4 | IQ | 24 | 8 | 2021–2021 |
| 5 | SENSEIQ | 21 | 8 | 2021–2021 |
| 6 | INNOVATION YOU | 12 | 12 | 2013–2013 |
| 7 | OPTICARDIOGRAM | 11 | 6 | 2017–2017 |
| 8 | GAGGIA | 8 | 5 | 1979–2019 |
| 9 | DOSEWISE | 6 | 6 | 2015–2015 |
| 10 | VISAPURE | 6 | 6 | 2015–2015 |
| 11 | DUNLEE | 5 | 5 | 2017–2017 |
| 12 | LIGHTXCHANGE | 5 | 5 | 2001–2001 |
| 13 | SONICARE | 5 | 5 | 2013–2014 |
| 14 | SAECO | 5 | 3 | 1999–2019 |
| 15 | BLUECONTROL | 4 | 4 | 2014–2014 |
Logos filed most often (since 2020)
Philips' logos
The 11 different logos Philips has had published since 2020 – each logo shown once, however many classes or versions it was filed in. Logos protected in more classes come first.
How quickly its trademarks are registered
Over the last five years, Philips' marks took a median of 3.3 years from filing to registration, slower than the market's 2.7 years. Most of that time is examination: 2.5 years from filing to acceptance (market: 1.9). Registration itself follows about half a year after acceptance.
Median years from filing to registration per registration year, split into examination (filing → acceptance) and acceptance → registration; the dashed line is the market median. A high recent value means older applications came through that year.
Who files the most in Philips' classes
Ranked by number of trademarks filed in Philips' main classes – any company that files there, whatever else it does (including retailers' own brands). This shows Philips' market position, not who is most like it.
In the last five years, Philips was #100 of 4,926 filers in class 9 (electronics & software), with 9 of 10,252 trademarks; #20 of 814 filers in class 10 (medical devices), with 8 of 1,561 trademarks; #4 of 395 filers in class 8 (hand tools), with 11 of 691 trademarks.
Philips' share of all trademarks filed in each of its main classes, per filing year.
Top trademark filers in class 9 (electronics & software), South Africa 1975–2024: Philips
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/philips-south-african-trademarks/class-9-race-video.html
Main competitors – the companies most like Philips
Ranked by how similar their whole trademark portfolio is to Philips' – the same mix of classes and the same words in their marks – not by size. Large filers in its classes that do something different rank lower here.
Philips' closest competitors in South Africa are Xiaomi, Coloplast and Panasonic.
Philips trademarks vs competitors: filings per year, 2010–2024
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/philips-south-african-trademarks/competitors-video.html
Trademark filings per year: Philips (orange) and its five closest competitors.
| # | Company | Relationship | Similarity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Xiaomi | Direct competitor | 64% |
| 2 | Coloplast | Direct competitor | 62% |
| 3 | Panasonic | Direct competitor | 61% |
| 4 | Reckitt | 75% | |
| 5 | Lrc Products | 68% | |
| 6 | Essity | 68% | |
| 7 | Massmart | Retailer's own brands | 80% |
| 8 | Suning International Services | Retailer's own brands | 66% |
| 9 | Aldi | Retailer's own brands | 66% |
| 10 | Shoprite | Retailer's own brands | 65% |
Similarity of trademark activity since 2015 (classes and words used in marks). Retailers appear where their own brands compete on the shelf.
Philips – relevant export countries
South Africa exported US$1.0 billion of the goods Philips' main classes cover in the last year – computer software; computers; computer programs; computer hardware (class 9); instruments; surgical; parts; massage apparatus (class 10); razors; blades; parts; clippers (class 8); parts; electric; heaters; machines (class 11); brushes; containers; dispensers; combs (class 21). Combining where these goods are exported, imported, growing and made (and copied), and what protection costs, these are the markets where Philips' trademarks matter most.
Adjust the weightings
These weightings decide how the countries below are ranked. Change any value and the others adjust to keep the total at 100%.
Worldwide
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 5 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | European Union | 77 | US$99 m | +1% | National | US$2,388 |
| 2 | United States of America | 72 | US$44 m | +4% | National | US$3,425 |
| 3 | United Kingdom | 65 | US$18 m | -1% | National | US$1,371 |
| 4 | Japan | 59 | US$1.2 m | -0% | National | US$1,774 |
| 5 | India | 58 | US$1.5 m | +0% | National | US$1,295 |
| 6 | Canada | 57 | US$2.9 m | -4% | National | US$2,192 |
| 7 | Australia | 56 | US$10 m | -3% | National | US$2,380 |
| 8 | Hong Kong SAR | 56 | US$2.2 m | +11% | National | US$1,715 |
| 9 | Russian Federation | 56 | US$9.3 m | +3% | National | US$1,915 |
| 10 | Namibia | 55 | US$165 m | +13% | ARIPO | US$450 |
Africa
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 5 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Namibia | 55 | US$165 m | +13% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 2 | Zimbabwe | 49 | US$92 m | +8% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 3 | Botswana | 49 | US$146 m | -13% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 4 | OAPI (17 states) | 46 | US$13 m | +6% | National | US$1,563 S&Z |
| 5 | Nigeria | 46 | US$6.2 m | -5% | National | US$1,015 S&Z |
| 6 | Morocco | 45 | US$265 k | +13% | National | US$1,408 |
| 7 | Mozambique | 44 | US$54 m | -3% | ARIPO | US$450 S&Z |
| 8 | Algeria | 44 | US$147 k | +37% | National | US$1,445 |
| 9 | Egypt | 43 | US$334 k | -7% | National | US$2,278 |
| 10 | Eswatini | 43 | US$49 m | -7% | National | US$446 |
SA exports = South Africa's exports of these goods to the market in the last year. Ranked with the default weightings. Score 0–100 from South Africa's exports of the goods to the market, net imports, import growth, foreign trademark filings, where the goods are made, market size and the cost of protection. Costs are total fees (official and professional) to file in 5 classes; ARIPO costs are per country, plus US$301 once per ARIPO application; S&Z = S&Z's own all-in price. Goods are taken from the classes and specifications, so the ranking is indicative.
Trade data: CEPII BACI (version 202601, trade flows 2022–2024), Licence Etalab 2.0; aggregated and combined with other data by S&Z.
Protecting its top brands in Nigeria and OAPI with S&Z
| Brand | Classes | Nigeria | OAPI (17 states) |
|---|---|---|---|
| PHILIPS | 27 | US$5,481 | US$5,626 |
| AVENT | 20 | US$4,060 | US$4,333 |
| UGROW | 15 | US$3,045 | US$3,410 |
| IQ | 8 | US$1,624 | US$2,117 |
| SENSEIQ | 8 | US$1,624 | US$2,117 |
S&Z all-in prices per brand in its number of classes, filing to registration.
TM Country Selection Rank the countries for your own goods and get the quotes.
Word marks you may have considered opposing
For Philips' five most-filed brands: word marks of other companies (not Philips' own group) that our similar word mark search, SimTM, found in the brand's own classes, and that we consider confusingly similar – from the earliest match found to today.
Similar to PHILIPS (classes 8, 9, 10, 11, 42; searched 2022-05-25 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to AVENT (classes 8, 9, 10, 11, 42; searched 2018-01-31 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to UGROW (classes 8, 9, 10, 11, 42; no close matches in the search)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found.
Similar to SENSEIQ (classes 8, 9, 10, 11, 21, 38, 42, 44; searched 2020-02-26 to 2026-11-07)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to INNOVATION YOU (classes 8, 9, 10, 11, 42; searched 2018-01-31 to 2026-11-08)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similarity of the words only. Whether a mark could have been opposed depends on the goods and services, the reputation of the brand and the facts – S&Z can advise. New marks like these are what SimTM watch reports as they are published.
How S&Z can help you
S&Z does not just file trademarks. We are a technology-first firm that manages trademarks – analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected.
We manage your trademarks – not just file them
Analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected:
Filing and renewal at fixed, all-inclusive prices
S&Z prices – South African trademarks
| Filing, first class – incl. official fee, examination report, routine office action, acceptance, publication, registration and e-certificate | US$240 |
| Each additional class of the same mark, filed at the same time | US$225 |
| Renewal online, per class (every 10 years from filing) | R1,027 ≈ US$62.29 |
Renewal in rand; US$ at R16.49 per US$.
Philips' next five years of renewals
198 of Philips' registered marks reach their ten-year renewal date in 2027–2031. Renewed online with S&Z, that costs about US$12,333 over the five years.
Philips: frequently asked questions
What should Philips consider for its trademarks?
- Where to file next: its goods sell strongly in Namibia, Zimbabwe and Botswana – markets where South African exports of the same goods are large or growing, and where S&Z files at its own all-in prices (see “Philips – relevant export countries”).
- Fewer new brands: new brand names fell from 5.0 to 0.8 a year – worth reviewing whether planned launches are being protected early enough.
- Renewals and use: keep track of the ten-year renewal dates and of marks that are no longer used – unused marks can be challenged after five years, and some may no longer be worth renewing.