Top 5 Germany Wind Energy Companies
Enercon GmbH
Nordex SE
Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy, S.A.
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
GE Vernova (GE Renewable Energy)
Source: Mordor Intelligence
Germany Wind Energy Companies Matrix by Mordor Intelligence
Our comprehensive proprietary performance metrics of key Germany Wind Energy players beyond traditional revenue and ranking measures
This MI Matrix can place turbine OEMs, TSOs, developers, and service firms differently because it rewards what is observable in Germany today, not only the biggest balance sheets. It also weighs delivery readiness, asset intensity, and post 2023 program momentum that directly affects project timelines and contracted output. In Germany, executives often need a clear view of which turbine platforms are already being ordered at scale with long service terms, and which offshore projects have credible energisation dates. They also need to know which HVDC programs are pacing offshore delivery and where repowering is becoming the fastest route to new capacity. Capability signals such as German site footprint, commissioning track record, control system maturity, and reliability in constrained grids explain these differences. The MI Matrix by Mordor Intelligence is better for supplier and competitor evaluation than revenue tables alone because it links Germany specific delivery evidence to forward execution risk.
MI Competitive Matrix for Germany Wind Energy
The MI Matrix benchmarks top Germany Wind Energy Companies on dual axes of Impact and Execution Scale.
Analysis of Germany Wind Energy Companies and Quadrants in the MI Competitive Matrix
Comprehensive positioning breakdown
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
Order traction in 2025 signals this major OEM is aligning its platform roadmap with German permitting and repowering realities. Vestas said it passed 1 GW of firm orders in Germany for its 7+ MW variants and began first commercial installs in 2025. The company also keeps locking multi year service agreements in Germany, including bundled orders with wpd that reinforce availability expectations. If grid curtailment rises in the north, Vestas can benefit by selling control upgrades and service packages that lift output within existing constraints. The main operational risk is tight installation scheduling around HVDC connection readiness.
Enercon GmbH
Repowering in Germany is changing Enercon's stance because capacity additions can happen fastest through replacement projects. Enercon announced a supply contract for 13 E-175 EP5 E2 turbines for Alterric, positioned as one of the first German projects using that model and aimed at replacing older units. Public support for domestic capacity also matters, since Enercon's Aurich site received backing tied to ramping industrial production of new models. If tender competition keeps rising, Enercon's pitch can lean on yield per site to reduce planning friction. A key risk is component throughput if demand spikes faster than tower and nacelle lines can scale.
RWE AG
Capital discipline is visible in RWE's staged build plan for large German offshore clusters and in how it lines up suppliers early. RWE took an investment decision for the 1.6 GW Nordseecluster and set out commissioning timing that depends on offshore construction beginning in 2025 and phased delivery through 2029. RWE also agreed with TotalEnergies on joint development of two 2 GW German offshore projects awarded in 2024, which can spread execution risk while keeping scale. If corporate offtake demand strengthens, RWE can bundle power and flexibility products with its build pipeline. The key risk is schedule slippage from HVDC connection bottlenecks.
Siemens Energy AG (Grid solutions)
HVDC execution has become Siemens Energy's most visible Germany wind lever because it determines when offshore projects can actually deliver power onshore. A 2024 contract with 50Hertz covers offshore and onshore conversion stations for the LanWin3 connection with 2 GW capacity, under a consortium that includes Siemens Energy. The Bornholm Energy Island program also advanced in 2025 with EU funding contracts signed by Energinet and 50Hertz, supporting cross border integration that relies on converter delivery. If multi terminal HVDC becomes standard, Siemens Energy can deepen its software and control advantages. A key risk is interface complexity across yards, cables, and commissioning windows.
TenneT TSO GmbH
Offshore delivery timelines in Germany increasingly track TenneT's HVDC program cadence, making it a central execution gate. rsted described Borkum Riffgrund 3 as directly connected to TenneT's DolWin epsilon platform, linking project energisation to TenneT's readiness. Ownership structure is also shifting, with Reuters reporting German plans to acquire a minority holding in TenneT Germany and allocate capital for expansion needs. If capital inflows accelerate, TenneT can reduce bottlenecks by parallelising converter and onshore works. The main risk is multi project schedule congestion across the German Bight.
Frequently Asked Questions
What should I check first when selecting a turbine OEM in Germany?
Confirm German type readiness, service response time, and spare parts access near your sites. Validate multi year service terms and performance guarantees against curtailment conditions.
How do repowering projects usually fail, even after permits look secure?
Grid connection timing and local acceptance can still delay construction starts. Older site constraints like roads and crane pads can also add unexpected cost and schedule risk.
What is the single biggest schedule risk for new offshore projects in Germany?
HVDC and onshore converter delivery often set the critical path. A wind farm can be fully installed but still wait for energisation if connection works slip.
How should buyers compare O&M providers for offshore fleets?
Look for proven turbine type experience, port logistics, and training capacity for high voltage work. Ask for outage analytics and availability methods, not only headcount.
When does a corporate PPA make sense for German wind assets?
It fits best when it stabilises revenues after EEG expiry or enables financing for new build without full reliance on auctions. The contract should address profile risk and curtailment.
What is a practical way to reduce curtailment and congestion exposure?
Prioritise sites with clearer grid headroom and specify control upgrades that support grid compliant operation. Pair offtake with flexibility products where possible, especially for larger portfolios.
Methodology
Research approach and analytical framework
Data sourcing used recent public materials such as annual reports, investor updates, filings, and official press rooms, plus selected named journalist coverage. Evidence was applied consistently across public and private firms using observable Germany signals like orders, permits, contracts, and site activity. When direct Germany financial splits were not available, scores relied on Germany anchored program commitments and contract disclosures. Conflicting signals were triangulated across multiple reputable sources.
German factories, ports, service hubs, and grid corridors determine who can deliver at German permitting speed.
Bankability with German lenders, insurers, and public authorities affects approvals, PPAs, and repowering decisions.
Relative capture of German turbine orders, operating capacity, service contracts, or grid connections shows real positioning.
German ready crews, vessels, HVDC programs, and spare parts depth reduce outage time and commissioning slippage.
German type readiness, grid compliant controls, and HVDC architecture progress since 2023 shape feasible build rates.
Germany linked earnings stability supports warranty work, O&M staffing, and multi year construction commitments.
