About half of the world's largest construction, mining, and agricultural equipment manufacturers report their warranty expenses. About three-quarters of the top ten largest global heavy equipment manufacturers report their warranty costs, including the top three OEMs, which collectively accounted for one-third of all global construction equipment sales in 2024: Caterpillar Inc., Komatsu Ltd., and Deere & Co.

We're tracking the top 55 global heavy equipment manufacturers, of which 23 include their warranty expenses in their annual reports. Together, we estimate that these 23 OEMs accounted for about 82% of the global heavy equipment industry's total warranty expenses. We then fashioned estimates for the remaining 18% of global heavy equipment warranty expenses racked up by the other 32 OEMs.

Methodology

For each of the 23 heavy equipment manufacturers that reported their warranty expenses in 2024, we perused their annual reports to extract three key warranty metrics: the amount of claims paid, the amount of accruals made, and the amount of reserves held at the end of the fiscal year.

We also collected data on the amount of product sales revenue — meaning revenue generated from the sale of products that come with warranties, excluding revenue generated from services, extended warranty sales, apparel, etc. — made by each manufacturer during the fiscal year. Using these data, we calculated two additional warranty metrics: claims as a percentage of sales (the claims rate), and accruals as a percentage of sales (the accrual rate).

Among the 23 companies that did publish their warranty expenses in 2024, there were manufacturers reporting their expenses in U.S. dollars, Euro, Japanese yen, South Korean won, Swedish kroner, Canadian dollars, and Chinese yuan. In order to compare these figures, we converted all of the data from their native currencies to U.S. dollars, using the U.S. Internal Revenue Service's Yearly Average Currency Exchange Rates table.

For the remaining 34 manufacturers, we needed to craft estimates for their warranty expenses. Most of these manufacturers are either privately owned, or, in the case of some of the Chinese manufacturers, government-owned, and thus have no obligation to publicly publish their annual reports. For these cases, we gathered each manufacturer's revenue data from International Construction magazine's annual IC Yellow Table.

The Yellow Table isn't a warranty-focused publication, but it does compile a list of the top 50 global construction OEMs, and ranks them based on annual product sales revenue. The Yellow Table calls these figures "construction equipment sales," and presents all data in U.S. dollars, regardless of the currency in which the manufacturer reports. We don't know which currency conversion rates International Construction uses. Although it's called the 2025 Yellow Table, based on the year in which it was published, the data are from the calendar year 2024.

Once we gathered each OEM's 2024 product sales revenue data, we crafted estimates for their annual warranty expenses, based on each company's primary market, closest competitors, and the industry average warranty expense rates.

The Heavy Equipment Manufacturers

For 2024, out of 55 we tracked, the 23 OEMs for which we had warranty hard data represented 82% of the global heavy equipment product revenue, and we estimate that they represented 82% of the total global warranty expenses as well.

In Figures 1, 2, and 4 in this report, we presented the top 11 manufacturers by each warranty metric, with the other 44 companies represented in the "Other" category.

Of the named companies in the following charts, we crafted estimates for three manufacturers. Two were based in China: state-owned construction equipment maker Xuzhou Construction Machinery Group Co. Ltd. (XCMG), and concrete machinery maker Sany Heavy Industry Co. Ltd. There was also the family-owned German-Swiss construction and agricultural equipment maker Liebherr-International AG.

There were eight top heavy equipment manufacturers named in the following charts, for which we had hard data.

From the United States, there was construction and mining equipment maker Caterpillar Inc., and agricultural equipment maker Deere & Co. Caterpillar and Deere were first and third in the 2025 Yellow Table, sandwiched by Komatsu.

From Japan, there was construction, mining, and forestry equipment manufacturer Komatsu Ltd., which was second in the 2025 Yellow Table. In seventh place in the 2025 Yellow Table was construction and mining equipment maker Hitachi Construction Machinery Co., Ltd.. Hitachi Construction Machinery was spun-off from the parent Hitachi Ltd. in 1970, and the conglomerate retains 25% ownership of the construction equipment business. There was also agricultural and construction equipment manufacturer Kubota Corp., which ranked 17th on the 2025 Yellow Table.

From Sweden, there was Volvo AB, also known as Volvo Group. The company's Volvo Construction Equipment subsidiary ranked eighth on the 2025 Yellow Table. Volvo Group also owns the Volvo Truck, Mack Trucks, and Renault Trucks heavy truck brands. Although the two still share the same logo, Volvo Group is not to be confused with its former subsidiary Volvo Cars, which was first sold to the U.S.-based Ford Motor Co. in 1999, and subsequently sold to the China-based Geely Auto in 2010.

Because this report focuses on the warranty expenses of makers of heavy equipment, including implements used for agriculture, mining, and construction, Volvo AB is unique in this report because it is also a significant maker of on-highway heavy trucks. However, other direct competitors in that field, including Cummins, Paccar, and Daimler, are not included in this report, as their primary product line is outside of this scope, and those manufacturers are thus not included in the Yellow Table, which we used as a statistical basis for this report.

From Italy, there was CNH Industrial N.V., which is the successor company formed by the 2012 merger of CNH Global NV and Fiat Industrial S.p.A. CNH ranked 19th in the 2025 Yellow Table. CNH owns the American agricultural equipment brands Case IH and New Holland, along with Austrian brand Steyr Tractor. In turn, Case IH was formed in 1985 through the merger of J.I. Case and the agricultural division of International Harvester. Although CNH is considered an Italian company, it is currently based in the Netherlands.

The final named company in the following charts is Doosan Bobcat, based in South Korea, which ranked 11th in the 2025 Yellow Table. The Korean Doosan Infracore acquired the Bobcat construction equipment brand from Ingersoll Rand in 2007, South Korea's largest international acquisition to that date.

The South Korean heavy equipment industry has gotten a bit complicated in the past few years. In 2018, Doosan Group split into two separate companies, Doosan Infracore and Doosan Bobcat. In 2021, Hyundai Heavy Industries acquired Doosan Infracore, and renamed it HD Hyundai Infracore.

There are three South Korean companies included in the 2025 Yellow Table: Doosan Bobcat (11th), HD Hyundai Infracore (21st), and HD Hyundai Construction Equipment (25th). The latter two are owned by the same parent conglomerate, HD Hyundai Co. Ltd. Doosan Bobcat, officially named Doosan Corp., reports its warranty expenses, but neither of the two Hyundai subsidiaries do.

We'll also note that different countries have different norms around fiscal years and financial reporting. Virtually every Japanese manufacturer uses a fiscal year that spans from April 1 to March 31. Most of the other manufacturers use the calendar year system, but this varies from company to company.

Following the Yellow Table's lead, we standardized these dates to the corresponding calendar year in which the majority of the fiscal year occurred. For instance, the Japanese fiscal year that spanned April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025 was considered 2024 in our data.

Warranty Claims Totals

Figure 1 shows the total warranty claims paid by the 55 largest global heavy equipment manufacturers, from 2020 to 2024.

In 2024, Deere paid $1.33 billion in warranty claims, a 12% increase from 2023. Volvo AB paid $988 million in warranty claims in 2024, a 20% increase. Caterpillar paid $824 million, a -1% decrease from the prior year.

CNH paid $570 million in warranty claims in 2024, a 12% increase from 2023. Komatsu paid $369 million, a 1% increase. Kubota paid $361 million, a 2% increase. Fellow Japanese countryman Hitachi paid $159 million in warranty claims in 2024, a 20% increase from 2023. And Doosan paid $121 million in claims, a 23% increase.

We estimate that the warranty claims costs of XCMG, Sany, and Liebherr also increased, based on industry-wide data as well as each OEM's own sales statistics. We estimate that the other 44 global heavy equipment OEMs paid $935 million in claims, a 12% increase from 2023.

We have hard data from three more relatively large American heavy equipment manufacturers as well. JLG, the construction equipment-focused subsidiary of the American manufacturer Oshkosh Corp., paid $60 million in warranty claims in 2024, a 17% increase from 2023. Terex, and its aerial work platform subsidiary Genie Industries, paid $49 million in claims in 2024, a 12% increase. And construction crane manufacturer The Manitowoc Company Inc. paid $26 million in claims in 2024, a 15% increase.

One of the only Chinese heavy equipment manufacturers that reports its warranty expenses is Zoomlion Heavy Industry Science and Technology, which makes construction and agricultural equipment. Zoomlion paid $20 million in claims in 2024, a -25% decrease from the year prior.

The Swedish mining equipment manufacturer Sandvik AB paid $32 million in claims in 2024, a 11% increase. And German construction equipment manufacturer Wacker Neuson SE paid $22 million in claims, a 31% increase.

Overall, we estimate that the top 55 global heavy equipment manufacturers paid $6.15 billion in warranty claims in 2024, an 11% increase from 2023's total of $5.53 billion.

Warranty Accrual Totals

Figure 2 shows the total warranty accruals made by the top 55 global heavy equipment manufacturers, from 2020 to 2024.

Volvo AB set aside $1.29 billion in warranty accruals in 2024, a 20% increase from 2023. At the same time, its two largest American competitors, Deere and Caterpillars, both decreased their warranty accruals. Deere set aside $1.16 billion in product warranty accruals in 2024, a -14% decrease from 2023. And Caterpillar set aside just $630 million in warranty accruals, which was a rather significant -35% decrease from 2023's $968 million.

CNH set aside $682 million in warranty accruals in 2024, an 11% increase from 2023.

The three top Japanese heavy equipment OEMs set aside similar amounts in warranty accruals in fiscal 2024. Kubota set aside $418 million in accruals in 2024, a -5% decrease from 2023. Komatsu set aside $399 million, a -1% decrease. And Hitachi drastically increased its warranty accruals by 47% in fiscal 2024, to $300 million.

Doosan set aside $118 million in accruals in 2024, an 11% increase from 2023.

We estimate that the other 44 OEMs collectively set aside another $1.05 billion in warranty accruals, an increase of just 3%.

Oshkosh Corp. and its JLG subsidiary set aside $67 million in warranty accruals in 2024, a 29% increase from 2023. The Finnish mining equipment maker Metso Corp. set aside $56 million in warranty accruals in 2024, a 1% increase. Sandvik set aside $39 million in accruals, a -7% decrease. And the American heavy equipment maker Terex set aside $39 million in warranty accruals in 2024, a -3% decrease from 2023.

Overall, we estimate that the top 55 global heavy equipment manufacturers set aside about $6.51 billion in warranty accruals in 2024, a -1% decrease from 2023.

Warranty Expense Rates

Figure 3 shows ten years of average warranty expense rates for the global heavy equipment industry, from 2015 to 2024. As always, we calculate the claims and accrual rates by dividing the respective warranty statistic by the total product sales revenue, whether that's industry-wide or for individual manufacturers.

With revenue figures, we diverge a bit from the IC Yellow Table, because we count each company's total heavy equipment revenue — not just for construction equipment, but also for agricultural equipment, mining equipment, and in the case of a few companies such as Volvo Group, even for some on-highway trucks. This is because no manufacturers segment their warranty expense data in the same way that they segment revenue data, and we need to keep the scope wider to ensure the numbers in the numerator and denominator of the rate formula describe the same thing.

On that basis, the denominator we use for the industry-wide total product sales revenue is about twice that reported by the IC Yellow Table. Anything else, such as an attempt to produce numbers just for construction equipment warranty, without the OEMs themselves providing warranty data segmented by industry or product type, would occlude the data with far too much conjecture.

For similar reasons, we only calculated the averages depicted in Figure 3 using data from the 23 OEMs for which we have hard warranty data, excluding those for which we crafted warranty estimates using the Yellow Table revenue figures.

In 2024, the industry average warranty claims rate was 1.37%, and the average warranty accrual rate was 1.45%.

Many of the largest manufacturers in the industry had warranty expense rates above the industry average in 2024. CNH lad the largest warranty claims and accrual rates in the heavy equipment industry in 2024, with a claims rate of 3.34%, and an accrual rate of 3.68%. Both of these expense rates increased by about one-half from 2023 to 2024.

Deere had a claims rate of 2.77%, up about one-third from 2023, but its accrual rate remained at 2.41%, almost no change from the year prior.

Caterpillar's warranty expense rates were right on the industry average, with a claims rate of 1.34%, and an accrual rate of 1.03%. The claims rate was unchanged from 2023, but the accrual rate decreased by about one-third.

Volvo Group had a warranty claims rate of 1.98% in 2024, and an accrual rate of 2.58%, with both expense rates up by about one-fifth from 2023.

The Swedish mining equipment manufacturer Epiroc AB saw its warranty expense rates increase by about three-quarters from 2023 to 2024. Its claims rate increased from 0.41% in 2023, to 0.75% in 2024, and the accrual rate increased from 0.71% in 2023, to 1.26% in 2024.

Warranty Reserve Balances

Our final warranty metric is the balance of each manufacturer's warranty reserve fund at the end of each fiscal year. Figure 4 shows the warranty reserve end-balances for the global heavy equipment industry, from 2020 to 2024.

At the end of 2024, Volvo Group held $1.86 billion in warranty reserves, a 14% increase from the end of 2023. Caterpillar held $1.70 billion in reserves, a -10% decrease. And Deere held $1.45 billion, a -10% decrease as well.

Hitachi held $728 million in warranty reserves at the end of fiscal 2024, a 23% increase from the end of fiscal 2023. Recall that the Japanese manufacturers use a fiscal year that spans from April 1 to March 31. Kubota held $542 million in reserves, a 1% increase. And Komatsu held $433 million in reserves, a -1% decrease.

CNH held $633 million in warranty reserves at the end of 2024, a 4% increase from the end of the year prior. And Doosan held $359 million in reserves at the end of 2024, a 6% increase.

Metso held $132 million in reserves at the end of 2024, a 25% increase from the end of 2023. Oshkosh held $73 million, a 13% increase. Sandvik held $55 million, a 2% increase. Terex held $54 million, a 13% increase. And Manitowoc held $45 million, a -20% decrease.

The French construction equipment manufacturer Manitou Group held $39 million in warranty reserves at the end of 2024, a 3% increase from the year prior. The Canadian manufacturer Linamar Corp., which makes construction lifts under its subsidiary Skyjack Inc., held $37 million in reserves at the end of 2024, a 27% increase.

Wacker Neuson held $31 million in reserves, a -1% decrease. Epiroc held $28 million in reserves, an 8% increase. And Zoomlion held $26 million in reserves at the end of 2024, a 46% increase from the end of the year prior.