+353-1-416-8900REST OF WORLD
+44-20-3973-8888REST OF WORLD
1-917-300-0470EAST COAST U.S
1-800-526-8630U.S. (TOLL FREE)
New

Hose Band Market - Global Forecast 2026-2032

  • PDF Icon

    Report

  • 193 Pages
  • January 2026
  • Region: Global
  • 360iResearch™
  • ID: 6128723
1h Free Analyst Time
1h Free Analyst Time

Speak directly to the analyst to clarify any post sales queries you may have.

The Hose Band Market grew from USD 92.15 million in 2025 to USD 105.26 million in 2026. It is expected to continue growing at a CAGR of 9.63%, reaching USD 175.48 million by 2032.

Hose bands are no longer minor hardware: rising uptime demands, stricter compliance, and harsher operating profiles elevate their strategic importance

Hose bands sit at the intersection of safety, uptime, and compliance, even though they are often treated as commodity components. In fluid transfer systems, a band’s ability to maintain clamp load under vibration, temperature cycling, and pressure pulsation can be the difference between stable performance and costly leakage events. As industrial maintenance teams push for higher equipment availability and OEMs pursue lighter, more compact assemblies, the expectations placed on fastening and sealing hardware have risen sharply.

At the same time, procurement and engineering functions are being asked to collaborate more closely than ever. Engineers want predictable torque-to-tension behavior, corrosion resistance aligned to the environment, and compatibility with modern hose materials that may cold-flow or creep over time. Procurement teams, meanwhile, need reliable lead times, consistent metallurgy, and documentation that satisfies internal quality systems and external regulatory demands. These priorities converge in the hose band category, making supplier capability, material selection, and quality assurance central topics rather than afterthoughts.

Against this backdrop, the hose band landscape is being reshaped by shifts in manufacturing automation, stricter expectations for traceability, and increased scrutiny of total installed cost. Understanding how performance requirements, supply chain pressures, and evolving end-use needs interact is essential for making decisions that reduce risk while supporting productivity and long-term asset integrity.

The hose band market is shifting toward engineered clamp performance, traceable materials, and automated quality that reduce failure risk across lifecycles

The hose band landscape is undergoing a notable transformation as end users seek more repeatable performance and suppliers respond with tighter process control. One major shift is the move from “good-enough tightening” toward engineered clamping solutions, where torque specifications, band geometry, and housing design are optimized to deliver consistent sealing force. This is particularly visible in applications exposed to vibration, thermal cycling, or frequent maintenance, where retightening intervals and clamp relaxation behavior directly affect safety and downtime.

In parallel, material science and surface engineering are playing a bigger role in product differentiation. Stainless steel variants remain central in corrosive environments, yet buyers are increasingly specific about grade selection, passivation, and surface finish to avoid premature pitting or galvanic interactions. Coated carbon steel continues to be used in cost-sensitive settings, but it is now evaluated more rigorously for coating integrity, edge protection, and resistance to road salts, chemicals, or washdown regimes. As a result, suppliers that can document material provenance and provide consistent finishing processes are gaining preference.

Manufacturing and quality practices are also shifting. Automation in stamping, forming, and screw assembly is improving dimensional consistency and reducing variability in clamping force. Alongside this, quality expectations have broadened to include tighter lot traceability, clearer labeling, and more robust incoming inspection at OEMs and distributors. These measures are being reinforced by digital tools that connect production data to quality records, enabling faster root-cause analysis when field issues arise.

Finally, sustainability and lifecycle cost thinking are influencing purchasing decisions. Buyers are paying more attention to durability, reusability, and the environmental implications of frequent replacements. This encourages adoption of designs that reduce hose damage and maintain load without excessive torque, which can extend service intervals. As these shifts continue, the hose band category is evolving from a price-driven purchase into a reliability-focused component choice shaped by engineering validation, supply chain resilience, and documented compliance.

United States tariff pressures in 2025 are reshaping hose band sourcing, contracts, and design-to-cost choices while amplifying qualification and continuity risks

United States tariff dynamics heading into 2025 are expected to influence hose band sourcing strategies, cost structures, and contractual approaches, particularly for products and inputs linked to imported steel and finished fasteners. Even when hose bands themselves are assembled domestically, exposure can persist through imported strip steel, screws, housings, or specialized stainless grades. As tariff treatment and enforcement evolve, companies are reassessing bills of materials to understand where cost risk concentrates and which components can be substituted without undermining performance.

One cumulative impact is a stronger bias toward supplier diversification and regionalization. Buyers are increasingly unwilling to rely on a single country of origin for critical clamp SKUs, especially those used in regulated or safety-sensitive applications. This is driving qualification of alternate suppliers and, in some cases, dual-sourcing strategies that balance domestic capacity with offshore redundancy. However, qualification is not trivial: clamp performance depends on metallurgy, thread quality, band edge condition, and forming tolerances, so supplier transitions often require validation testing and controlled change management.

Tariff uncertainty is also reshaping commercial terms. Longer pricing validity periods are becoming harder to secure without escalation clauses, and more contracts are incorporating language that clarifies tariff responsibility, documentation requirements, and lead-time expectations. Distributors and integrators are adjusting inventory strategies as well, favoring safety stock for high-run items while tightening assortment on slow movers to avoid carrying cost exposure if landed costs change abruptly.

Operationally, tariffs can accelerate design-to-cost initiatives and standardization. Engineering teams may be asked to rationalize clamp families, reduce the number of unique sizes, or shift toward designs that can be produced from more readily available materials. In higher-performance contexts, this can create tension between cost and reliability; therefore, the strongest outcomes typically come from cross-functional collaboration where engineering, quality, and sourcing align on acceptable substitutions and verification protocols.

Overall, the cumulative tariff impact in 2025 is likely to reward organizations that treat hose bands as part of a broader risk management program. Those that map supply chains, formalize qualification pathways, and build tariff-aware contracts will be better positioned to maintain continuity, protect margins, and prevent reactive product changes that could compromise sealing integrity.

Segmentation reveals how product design, material grade, size range, application stressors, and buyer channel needs redefine hose band value beyond price

Segmentation clarifies where performance expectations, buying behavior, and value drivers diverge across the hose band category. When viewed through product type, worm-drive designs remain a workhorse for general-purpose clamping due to ease of installation and broad availability, while T-bolt and heavy-duty variants tend to be selected where higher clamping force and resistance to vibration are required. Spring and constant-tension styles gain relevance when thermal expansion and contraction can cause load loss, and ear clamps appeal where tamper resistance, low profile, and assembly speed are prioritized.

Material-based segmentation is equally decisive because corrosion mechanisms and environmental exposure vary widely across end uses. Stainless steel options are commonly specified for marine, food handling, chemical exposure, and outdoor installations, but the real differentiation often comes from grade control, surface finish, and resistance to localized corrosion. Galvanized or coated carbon steel can be attractive in controlled environments or cost-sensitive builds, yet selection depends on coating durability, salt-spray tolerance, and compatibility with hose compounds to avoid abrasion or chemical interaction.

Size and clamping range segmentation influences both inventory strategy and application fit. Narrow bands can support compact assemblies but may concentrate pressure and risk hose damage if edges are not properly finished, whereas wider bands can distribute load more evenly but require more space and may increase weight. In maintenance-driven industries, standard size availability and interchangeability can outweigh incremental performance advantages, pushing buyers toward common dimensions that simplify stocking and reduce downtime.

Application segmentation brings the decision framework into focus. In automotive and transportation, clamp performance is shaped by temperature cycles, under-hood chemicals, and vibration, creating demand for reliable torque behavior and resistance to relaxation. In industrial processing and manufacturing, chemical compatibility, pressure stability, and maintenance frequency dominate. In construction and agriculture, ruggedness and resistance to dirt and moisture matter, while in marine contexts the combination of salt exposure and continuous vibration elevates the importance of stainless selection and long-term corrosion performance.

End-user segmentation further refines purchasing priorities. OEMs tend to value repeatability, documented quality systems, and design support that reduces assembly variability, while aftermarket and maintenance channels emphasize availability, packaging clarity, and ease of installation. Distributors often prioritize breadth of assortment and consistent replenishment, whereas specialized integrators focus on verified performance in specific systems. Across these segmentation lenses, the strongest competitive positions are built by aligning clamp design, material integrity, and supply assurance to the specific operational pain points of each customer group.

Regional patterns across the Americas, Europe-Middle East-Africa, and Asia-Pacific show distinct requirements for compliance, corrosion resilience, and supply continuity

Regional dynamics in the hose band market are shaped by industrial density, regulatory rigor, climate exposure, and supply chain structure. In the Americas, demand is influenced by a broad mix of automotive manufacturing, industrial maintenance, agriculture, and energy infrastructure. Buyers frequently emphasize availability, consistent quality, and domestic or nearshore sourcing options that reduce lead-time volatility. In many installations, weather and road-salt exposure elevate corrosion resistance requirements, pushing stainless usage in certain outdoor and transportation settings.

In Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, performance and compliance expectations often weigh heavily in purchasing decisions, especially where industrial standards, documentation practices, and safety requirements are tightly enforced. European buyers commonly prioritize traceability, material certification, and repeatable installation outcomes, while Middle Eastern infrastructure and process industries can place greater emphasis on durability in heat, dust, and continuous operation environments. Across parts of Africa, the balance can shift toward robustness and serviceability, with strong preference for products that tolerate challenging field conditions and variable maintenance resources.

In Asia-Pacific, the landscape combines large-scale manufacturing capability with diverse end-use growth, from automotive and electronics assembly to industrial equipment and construction. Competitive intensity can be high, and procurement teams often evaluate suppliers on quality consistency at scale, process control, and the ability to meet export-oriented compliance requirements. Coastal and tropical environments in parts of the region also heighten the importance of corrosion protection and long-term clamp integrity, especially in marine-adjacent industries and outdoor installations.

Across regions, a recurring theme is the tradeoff between cost, lead time, and quality assurance. As global supply chains face periodic disruptions and policy shifts, organizations increasingly treat regional sourcing not only as a cost lever but also as a resilience strategy. This regional lens helps explain why similar clamp types can be specified differently across markets, reflecting local environmental stressors, customer expectations, and the maturity of distribution and service networks.

Company differentiation now hinges on metallurgical control, automated consistency, documentation strength, and application engineering that prevents hose damage and leaks

Competition among hose band manufacturers is increasingly defined by process capability, metallurgical control, and the ability to support customers through documentation and application guidance. Leading suppliers typically differentiate through consistent band and housing forming, controlled screw hardness and thread quality, and surface treatments that resist corrosion without introducing brittleness or dimensional instability. These capabilities matter because clamp failures are often traced to variability-edges that cut into hoses, screws that strip under torque, or bands that relax after thermal cycling.

Another area of differentiation is engineering support and problem-solving speed. Customers value suppliers that can recommend clamp styles for specific hose materials, advise on installation torque windows, and provide guidance on mitigating relaxation and leakage in dynamic systems. For OEMs, the ability to co-design or customize band widths, housings, or fastener configurations can reduce assembly time and improve repeatability. For maintenance channels, clear labeling, packaging suited for field use, and dependable replenishment often matter as much as incremental product features.

Quality systems and traceability are increasingly decisive, especially for industries with audits, safety requirements, or warranty exposure. Suppliers that maintain robust lot tracking, consistent inspection protocols, and reliable certification packages can reduce the customer’s internal burden and shorten approval cycles. In parallel, manufacturers investing in automated production and in-line inspection are better positioned to maintain consistency at volume, which supports long-term supply agreements and reduces the risk of field failures.

Finally, distribution partnerships and geographic footprint shape competitive standing. Companies that pair strong manufacturing with responsive regional distribution can serve both large OEM programs and fragmented aftermarket demand. In an environment where buyers want resilience and optionality, the most trusted companies are those that combine dependable product performance with transparent documentation, predictable service levels, and a demonstrated ability to manage material and policy-driven volatility.

Actionable steps for leaders include engineered specifications, dual-sourcing with validation, assortment rationalization, and lifecycle feedback to cut failures

Industry leaders can strengthen performance and resilience by treating hose bands as engineered risk controls rather than interchangeable parts. Start by aligning engineering, quality, and procurement on a shared specification framework that prioritizes clamp load retention, corrosion resistance, and hose protection. This includes defining acceptable material grades, surface finishes, and screw properties, as well as installation torque guidance that can be replicated on the line and in the field.

Next, build a structured supplier qualification and change-management process. Dual-source critical SKUs where feasible, but require validation testing that reflects real operating conditions such as vibration, thermal cycling, pressure pulsation, and exposure to relevant chemicals. When alternates are introduced, control the transition through documented approvals, lot traceability expectations, and clear acceptance criteria so that cost savings do not translate into hidden reliability risk.

Then, rationalize assortment and standardize where it does not compromise performance. Reducing unnecessary size and style variation can simplify inventory, improve training, and strengthen negotiating leverage. At the same time, preserve specialized clamp designs for high-risk applications where constant tension, high clamp load, or low-profile geometry is necessary to protect hoses and maintain sealing integrity.

Finally, strengthen total cost discipline by tracking failure modes and maintenance outcomes. Capture data on stripped screws, hose damage, retightening frequency, and leak incidents, then feed those findings back into clamp selection and supplier scorecards. Over time, this closed-loop approach enables better specifications, fewer field issues, and purchasing decisions anchored in lifecycle value rather than unit price.

A rigorous methodology blends technical desk research, stakeholder interviews, and triangulated validation to connect hose band design realities with buying decisions

The research methodology integrates qualitative and analytical techniques to build a practical view of the hose band environment without relying on a single lens. It begins with structured secondary research across technical literature, standards guidance, trade documentation, import-export classification considerations, and public records that illuminate materials, manufacturing practices, and compliance themes. This stage establishes a baseline for understanding clamp designs, performance drivers, and the operational contexts in which failures occur.

Primary research then refines the findings through interviews and discussions with stakeholders such as manufacturers, distributors, engineers, quality managers, and procurement professionals. These conversations focus on real-world selection criteria, common installation errors, emerging requirements for traceability, and supplier qualification practices. Insights are cross-checked across multiple participant types to reduce bias and ensure that conclusions reflect the realities of both production and field maintenance.

The analysis phase applies triangulation to reconcile differing perspectives and identify consistent patterns. Product and end-use considerations are examined alongside supply chain and policy factors, including the implications of material sourcing and trade measures. Throughout, the methodology emphasizes repeatability and transparency by documenting assumptions, validating terminology, and ensuring that insights are grounded in verifiable technical and commercial logic.

Finally, editorial review is used to sharpen clarity and decision usefulness. Findings are organized to help readers translate technical attributes-such as band geometry, screw quality, and material grade-into procurement strategies and application-specific recommendations. This approach supports decisions that balance performance, compliance, and continuity in a market shaped by both engineering demands and external volatility.

Conclusion: hose band selection now demands cross-functional rigor, validated sourcing, and lifecycle performance focus to protect uptime and compliance

Hose bands have moved into a more consequential role as industries demand higher reliability, stricter documentation, and resilient supply. What appears to be a simple component is increasingly judged by how well it maintains clamp load under real operating stress, resists corrosion in diverse environments, and avoids damaging modern hose materials. As a result, engineering discipline and procurement rigor are converging around specifications, qualification, and lifecycle performance.

The broader landscape is also being shaped by automation-driven quality improvements, material and finishing expectations, and policy-related cost uncertainty. These forces elevate the importance of traceability, standardized installation practices, and supplier capability-not only to prevent failures but also to ensure continuity when sourcing conditions shift.

Organizations that respond with cross-functional governance, validated dual sourcing, and data-driven feedback loops are best positioned to reduce downtime and protect brand and warranty outcomes. In this environment, the most durable advantage comes from making hose band choices that are defensible technically, resilient commercially, and aligned to the operating conditions that matter most.

Table of Contents

1. Preface
1.1. Objectives of the Study
1.2. Market Definition
1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
1.4. Years Considered for the Study
1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
1.6. Language Considered for the Study
1.7. Key Stakeholders
2. Research Methodology
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Research Design
2.2.1. Primary Research
2.2.2. Secondary Research
2.3. Research Framework
2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
2.4. Market Size Estimation
2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
2.5. Data Triangulation
2.6. Research Outcomes
2.7. Research Assumptions
2.8. Research Limitations
3. Executive Summary
3.1. Introduction
3.2. CXO Perspective
3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
3.4. Market Share Analysis, 2025
3.5. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
3.6. New Revenue Opportunities
3.7. Next-Generation Business Models
3.8. Industry Roadmap
4. Market Overview
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
4.3. Porter’s Five Forces Analysis
4.4. PESTLE Analysis
4.5. Market Outlook
4.5.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0-2 Years)
4.5.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3-5 Years)
4.5.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5-10 Years)
4.6. Go-to-Market Strategy
5. Market Insights
5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
5.3. Opportunity Mapping
5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis
6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
8. Hose Band Market, by Clamping Mechanism
8.1. Ear Clamps
8.2. Screw Clamps
8.3. Spring Clamps
8.4. Wire Clamps
9. Hose Band Market, by Material
9.1. Carbon Steel
9.2. Plastic
9.3. Stainless Steel
10. Hose Band Market, by Application
10.1. Agriculture
10.1.1. Farm Machinery
10.1.2. Irrigation Equipment
10.2. Automotive
10.2.1. Commercial Vehicles
10.2.2. Passenger Vehicles
10.3. Construction
10.4. Household Appliances
10.5. Industrial
10.5.1. Manufacturing
10.5.2. Oil & Gas
11. Hose Band Market, by End User
11.1. Aftermarket
11.2. OEM
12. Hose Band 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. Hose Band Market, by Group
13.1. ASEAN
13.2. GCC
13.3. European Union
13.4. BRICS
13.5. G7
13.6. NATO
14. Hose Band 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. United States Hose Band Market
16. China Hose Band Market
17. Competitive Landscape
17.1. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
17.1.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
17.1.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
17.2. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
17.3. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
17.4. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025
17.5. BAND-IT IDEX Inc
17.6. Clampco Products Inc
17.7. Gates Corporation
17.8. Hengwei Check Hoop Co Ltd
17.9. Ideal Clamp Products
17.10. JCS Hi-Torque Ltd
17.11. Kale Clamp
17.12. Ladvik AB
17.13. Mikalor SA
17.14. Murray Corporation
17.15. Norma Group SE
17.16. Oetiker Group
17.17. Peterson Spring
17.18. Rotor Clip Company Inc
17.19. Tianjin Kainuo Industrial Co Ltd
List of Figures
FIGURE 1. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 2. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SHARE, BY KEY PLAYER, 2025
FIGURE 3. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET, FPNV POSITIONING MATRIX, 2025
FIGURE 4. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 5. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 6. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 7. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 8. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY REGION, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 9. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY GROUP, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 10. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2025 VS 2026 VS 2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 11. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
FIGURE 12. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
List of Tables
TABLE 1. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 2. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 3. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY EAR CLAMPS, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 4. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY EAR CLAMPS, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 5. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY EAR CLAMPS, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 6. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SCREW CLAMPS, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 7. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SCREW CLAMPS, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 8. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SCREW CLAMPS, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 9. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SPRING CLAMPS, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 10. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SPRING CLAMPS, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 11. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SPRING CLAMPS, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 12. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY WIRE CLAMPS, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 13. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY WIRE CLAMPS, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 14. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY WIRE CLAMPS, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 15. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 16. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CARBON STEEL, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 17. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CARBON STEEL, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 18. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CARBON STEEL, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 19. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PLASTIC, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 20. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PLASTIC, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 21. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PLASTIC, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 22. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY STAINLESS STEEL, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 23. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY STAINLESS STEEL, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 24. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY STAINLESS STEEL, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 25. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 26. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 27. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 28. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 29. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 30. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY FARM MACHINERY, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 31. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY FARM MACHINERY, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 32. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY FARM MACHINERY, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 33. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 34. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 35. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 36. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 37. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 38. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 39. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 40. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 41. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 42. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 43. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PASSENGER VEHICLES, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 44. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PASSENGER VEHICLES, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 45. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY PASSENGER VEHICLES, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 46. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CONSTRUCTION, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 47. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CONSTRUCTION, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 48. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CONSTRUCTION, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 49. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 50. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 51. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 52. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 53. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 54. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 55. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 56. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MANUFACTURING, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 57. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MANUFACTURING, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 58. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MANUFACTURING, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 59. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OIL & GAS, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 60. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OIL & GAS, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 61. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OIL & GAS, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 62. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 63. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AFTERMARKET, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 64. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AFTERMARKET, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 65. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AFTERMARKET, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 66. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OEM, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 67. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OEM, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 68. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY OEM, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 69. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY REGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 70. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SUBREGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 71. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 72. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 73. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 74. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 75. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 76. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 77. AMERICAS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 78. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 79. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 80. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 81. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 82. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 83. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 84. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 85. NORTH AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 86. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 87. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 88. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 89. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 90. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 91. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 92. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 93. LATIN AMERICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 94. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY SUBREGION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 95. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 96. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 97. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 98. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 99. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 100. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 101. EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 102. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 103. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 104. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 105. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 106. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 107. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 108. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 109. EUROPE HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 110. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 111. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 112. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 113. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 114. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 115. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 116. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 117. MIDDLE EAST HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 118. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 119. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 120. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 121. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 122. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 123. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 124. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 125. AFRICA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 126. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 127. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 128. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 129. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 130. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 131. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 132. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 133. ASIA-PACIFIC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 134. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY GROUP, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 135. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 136. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 137. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 138. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 139. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 140. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 141. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 142. ASEAN HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 143. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 144. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 145. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 146. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 147. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 148. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 149. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 150. GCC HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 151. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 152. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 153. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 154. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 155. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 156. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 157. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 158. EUROPEAN UNION HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 159. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 160. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 161. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 162. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 163. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 164. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 165. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 166. BRICS HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 167. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 168. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 169. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 170. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 171. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 172. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 173. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 174. G7 HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 175. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 176. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 177. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 178. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 179. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 180. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 181. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 182. NATO HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 183. GLOBAL HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY COUNTRY, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 184. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 185. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 186. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 187. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 188. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 189. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 190. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 191. UNITED STATES HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 192. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 193. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY CLAMPING MECHANISM, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 194. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY MATERIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 195. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY APPLICATION, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 196. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AGRICULTURE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 197. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY AUTOMOTIVE, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 198. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY INDUSTRIAL, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)
TABLE 199. CHINA HOSE BAND MARKET SIZE, BY END USER, 2018-2032 (USD MILLION)

Companies Mentioned

The key companies profiled in this Hose Band market report include:
  • BAND‑IT IDEX Inc
  • Clampco Products Inc
  • Gates Corporation
  • Hengwei Check Hoop Co Ltd
  • Ideal Clamp Products
  • JCS Hi‑Torque Ltd
  • Kale Clamp
  • Ladvik AB
  • Mikalor SA
  • Murray Corporation
  • Norma Group SE
  • Oetiker Group
  • Peterson Spring
  • Rotor Clip Company Inc
  • Tianjin Kainuo Industrial Co Ltd