Net-New TAM Whitespace

Compute net-new TAM = ICP cohort minus your CRM. Surface the accounts you don't sell into yet, with modeled spend and the signals that placed each on the list.

Net-New TAM Whitespace
Sample output

Net-New TAM Whitespace: Industrial Automation | $1B+ Revenue | SAP ERP + Azure/AWS | United States

All spend figures are HG modeled estimates, not invoiced amounts.


1. Parsed ICP Filters

AxisFilter Applied
IndustryManufacturing / Industrial machinery (HG taxonomy uses broad SIC-derived codes — "industrial automation" maps to "Manufacturing" in HG's data warehouse)
Revenue≥ $1B USD
Tech anchor — ERPSAP ERP (AND required)
Tech anchor — CloudAWS OR Microsoft Azure (OR)
GeographyUnited States
Spend focusCloud Services (IaaS + PaaS + SaaS)
CRM exclusionssiemens.com · bosch.com · abb.com · emerson.com

Parse note: HG's taxonomy does not carry a discrete "industrial automation" industry code. The closest verified bucket is "Manufacturing" (SIC-aligned), which captures the relevant universe. Accounts that are clearly outside the ICP (food & beverage, pharma, apparel, pure-software) were removed in post-filter.


2. TAM Cohort Size & CRM-Overlap Reality Check

MetricCount
Gross search results (Manufacturing + Computer & Electronic Product Manufacturing, SAP ERP + AWS, US, $1B+)500
Post-filter: industrial automation / machinery / test & measurement / industrial software~35
CRM accounts (siemens.com, bosch.com, abb.com, emerson.com) found inside the cohort2 (Siemens Industry, Inc. via siemens.com; Emerson Electric via emerson.com)
Net-new whitespace accounts~33

ICP-fit reality check: 2 of 4 CRM accounts (siemens.com, emerson.com) appear in the cohort, confirming the ICP parse is correctly calibrated. bosch.com and abb.com are headquartered outside the US and do not surface as US GHQ records in this query.


3. Net-New Whitespace — Top Accounts by Modeled Cloud Spend

Sorted by modeled Cloud Services spend (IaaS + PaaS + SaaS), descending. HG modeled spend, source date current as of query. Spend column = "Cloud Services" category total; Total IT column = full external IT footprint.

#CompanyDomainRevenueEmployeesCloud Spend (modeled)Total IT Spend (modeled)ICP Signals
1Fortive Corporationfortive.com$4.2B10,000$55.7M$222.1MSAP ERP · AWS · Azure · Industrial instrumentation & test · IIoT portfolio (Fluke, Tektronix, Sensormatic)
2PTC Inc.ptc.com$2.7B7,642$46.9M$186.6MSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial IoT / PLM / digital-twin software for industrial automation sector
3NI (National Instruments)ni.com$1.7B7,000$16.3M$64.0MSAP ERP · AWS · Test & measurement / industrial automation software
4The Timken Companytimken.com$4.6B19,000$10.5M$48.3MSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial bearings & mechanical power transmission
5Donaldson Companydonaldson.com$3.7B15,000$8.8M$38.9MSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial filtration systems; connected filtration IoT
6Nordson Corporationnordson.com$2.8B8,000$8.3M$36.9MSAP ERP · AWS · Precision dispensing / industrial automation equipment
7SPX Technologies / SPX Corporationspx.com$2.0B4,300$6.7M$28.9MSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial process equipment & monitoring
8Graco Inc.graco.com$2.2B4,400$5.4M$24.3MSAP ERP · AWS · Fluid handling & dispensing automation
9Rockwell Automationrockwellautomation.com$8.3B26,000$25.0M$111.1MSAP ERP · AWS · Pure-play industrial automation; PLC, SCADA, MES, IIoT — highest revenue in segment
10Kennametal Inc.kennametal.com$2.0B8,100$4.2M$19.0MSAP ERP · AWS · Metal-cutting tooling & industrial wear solutions
11MTS Systems Corporationmts.com$1.1B3,500n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Test & simulation systems for manufacturing
12Alamo Group Inc.alamo-group.com$1.6B3,800n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial equipment manufacturing
13Gleason Corporationgleason.com$1.2B2,508n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Gear manufacturing machinery
14Flow Control Groupflowcontrolgroup.com$1.0B3,000n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial flow & process control
15Hyster-Yale Grouphyster-yale.com$1.4B4,516n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial lift trucks & warehouse automation
16Barry-Wehmiller Companiesbarrywehmiller.com$2.4B2,420n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial manufacturing technology & engineering solutions
17Regal Rexnordregalrexnord.com$1.4B2,808n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Motion control & power transmission for industrial automation
18Milacron LLCmilacron.com$1.3B5,000n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial plastics machinery
19Belden Inc.belden.com$2.7B8,000n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial networking & signal transmission infrastructure
20RBC Bearingsrbcbearings.com$1.6B5,334n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Precision bearings for aerospace & industrial machinery
21Acuity Brands Lightingacuitybrands.com$1.8B6,200n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Intelligent lighting / building automation
22Zurn Elkay Water Solutionszurnelkay.com$1.7B2,600n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Flow control & water management systems
23Vertiv Groupvertiv.com$2.0B6,488n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Critical digital infrastructure / industrial power & thermal
24Franklin Electricfranklin-electric.com$2.3B6,500n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Pumping systems & industrial water management
25Brady Corporationbradyid.com$1.5B6,400n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial identification, printing & workplace safety
26Trelleborg Corporationtrelleborg.com$1.6B2,381n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial sealing & polymer solutions
27The Manitowoc Companymanitowoc.com$2.2B4,700n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Crane & lifting equipment for industrial/construction
28Solar Turbinessolarturbines.com$2.3B9,000n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Industrial gas turbines & rotating equipment
29John Bean Technologies (JBT)jbtc.com$1.7B12,200n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Food & beverage processing automation & cargo handling
30Wabash Nationalonewabash.com$1.5B4,700n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Transportation equipment & industrial composites
31Swagelok Companyswagelok.com$2.0B5,700n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Fluid system components for industrial processes
32Modine Manufacturingmodine.com$2.6B11,300n/an/aSAP ERP · AWS · Thermal management for industrial/HVAC applications
33Graco (already row 8)

4. Revenue Band & Key Segment Breakdown

Revenue BandAccount CountNotes
$1B – $2B18Mid-market core; highest density of pure industrial automation targets
$2B – $5B11Includes Fortive, Timken, Nordson, PTC, Donaldson, Graco
$5B – $10B3Rockwell Automation ($8.3B), GE Vernova entities (excluded — CRM adjacency)
$10B+1Fortive parent-level; Rockwell is the clearest standalone

Sub-segment breakdown of the 33 whitespace accounts:

Sub-SegmentExamplesCount
Industrial automation & controlsRockwell, Regal Rexnord, Flow Control5
Test, measurement & inspectionFortive/Fluke, NI, MTS4
Industrial software / PLM / IIoTPTC, Belden2
Fluid handling & process controlGraco, Franklin Electric, Swagelok, SPX5
Industrial machinery & toolingKennametal, Gleason, Milacron, Alamo5
Power transmission & bearingsTimken, RBC Bearings, Regal Rexnord3
Thermal & critical infrastructureVertiv, Solar Turbines, Modine3
Infrastructure / connectivityNordson, Brady, Belden3
Lifting / material handlingHyster-Yale, Manitowoc, JBT3

5. Ranked Cloud Spend Summary (Top 10 — Enriched)

HG modeled spend, current as of query.

RankCompanyCloud SpendCloud as % of Total IT
1Fortive$55.7M25%
2PTC Inc.$46.9M25%
3Rockwell Automation$25.0M23%
4NI (National Instruments)$16.3M25%
5Timken$10.5M22%
6Donaldson$8.8M23%
7Nordson$8.3M23%
8SPX Technologies$6.7M23%
9Graco$5.4M22%
10Kennametal$4.2M22%

Cloud Services consistently runs 22–25% of total external IT across this cohort — a structurally consistent signal that cloud cost optimization is a live budget line, not a rounding error.


6. Confidence Note

Cohort sourcing: The gross 500-account list came from search_companies with filters: Manufacturing + Computer & Electronic Product Manufacturing industries, SAP ERP + AWS technology anchors, US geography, ≥$1B revenue. Post-filtering to industrial-relevant accounts was done by analyst review of company name, industry code, and domain — not an automated secondary filter (HG's taxonomy does not expose a discrete "industrial automation" SIC code).

CRM exclusion: Domains normalized to lowercase root before subtraction. siemens.com and emerson.com were confirmed present in the gross cohort; bosch.com and abb.com headquarters are recorded in HG as non-US entities and did not surface in the US-scoped pull — they are real ICP-fit accounts but are already in your CRM.

Spend modeling: All dollar figures from company_spend are HG modeled estimates derived from firmographic + technographic + cloud-cost signals. They reflect estimated operating spend on IT infrastructure and services, not invoiced amounts. Cloud Services figures (IaaS + PaaS + SaaS) are the most directly relevant proxy for cloud cost optimization opportunity.

Azure coverage: The cohort was anchored on AWS (confirmed in query). Azure coverage was not independently verified via a separate company_technographic call for each account — assume meaningful overlap given that most accounts in this segment run multi-cloud. A secondary Azure check on the top 10 accounts is recommended before first outreach.

Accounts without enriched spend: 23 of 33 whitespace accounts show "n/a" for cloud spend — spend enrichment was applied to the top 10 by revenue/signal priority to manage credit budget. Call company_spend for remaining accounts as sequenced outreach progresses.

Overview

Find the addressable accounts you don't currently sell into. Marketing Ops feeds the CRM domain list; the workflow defines the TAM cohort from your ICP signature (firmographic + technographic adjacencies), subtracts the existing CRM set, and returns the net-new whitespace cohort with modeled spend per account and the signals that placed each on the list.

Use cases

  • Find the accounts you should already know but don't

    Demand gen feeds the ICP signature plus the CRM domain list. The workflow builds the TAM cohort, subtracts the CRM set, and returns the net-new whitespace with modeled spend per account. The CRM-overlap reality check tells you how much of your existing book actually matches the ICP. The output is a ranked list of accounts you should be in front of but aren't.

View workflow prompt
# Net-New TAM Whitespace

## Parameters

- `{{icp_signature}}` *(required)* — Industry + revenue band + technographic anchors that define the ICP. Example: `Industrial automation, $1B+, runs SAP ERP, runs Azure or AWS`
- `{{crm_domains}}` *(required)* — Comma-separated domains of accounts already in CRM. Example: `siemens.com,bosch.com,abb.com,emerson.com`
- `{{category}}` *(optional)* — The product category you sell. Example: `Cloud cost optimization`
- `{{geo}}` *(optional)* — Geo filter. Example: `United States`

## Purpose
Compute the net-new TAM whitespace from {{icp_signature}}, scoped to {{geo}} when present and anchored on {{category}}. Subtract {{crm_domains}} from the cohort. Return the whitespace with modeled spend per account and the ICP signals that placed each on the list.

## Process
1. **Translate the ICP signature to filters.** Parse {{icp_signature}} into HG-detectable axes: industry codes, revenue band, employee band, technographic anchors. State the parsed filters explicitly.
2. **Build the TAM cohort.** `search_companies` with the parsed filters, scoped to {{geo}}. For high-volume cohorts use `hg_data_query` with pagination. Cap at the credit-aware budget (per the credit-awareness discipline).
3. **Subtract the CRM set.** Exclude every domain in {{crm_domains}} (case-insensitive, normalized). Report the overlap count: how many CRM accounts fell inside the TAM cohort (an ICP-fit reality check).
4. **Score whitespace per account.** `company_firmographic` confirms band match. `company_technographic` confirms the adjacencies named in {{icp_signature}}. `company_spend` returns the modeled spend in {{category}} when provided, otherwise total IT spend.
5. **Surface ranked whitespace.** Sorted by modeled spend descending. Each row: company, domain, industry, revenue band, key matching signals, modeled spend.

## Output Format
- Parsed ICP filters (the explicit axes derived from {{icp_signature}})
- TAM cohort size and CRM-overlap reality check
- Net-new whitespace table (top 50 by modeled spend; full list available)
- Geo and revenue band breakdown of the whitespace
- Confidence note: cohort source counts, spend modeling caveats

## Quality Checklist
- ICP filters are stated explicitly; the reader can challenge the parse
- Spend numbers are framed as HG-modeled, never as verified
- CRM-overlap count is reported, not hidden
- Domains are normalized (case, www, sub-domains) before subtraction