The 2023-2028 Outlook for Cyber Securities for US Zip Codes

January 2023 | 512 pages | ID: 25CD1AE0308BEN
ICON Group International

Abstracts

This study covers the latent demand outlook for cyber securities across the states and zip codes of the United States. Latent demand (in millions of U.S. dollars), or potential industry earnings (P.I.E.) estimates are given across some 10,833 zip codes in the United States. For each zip code in question, the percent share the zip code is of its state and of the United States as a whole is reported. These comparative benchmarks allow the reader to quickly gauge a zip code vis-à-vis others. This statistical approach can prove very useful to distribution and/or sales force strategies. Using econometric models which project fundamental economic dynamics within each state and zip code, latent demand estimates are created for cyber securities. This report does not discuss the specific players in the market serving the latent demand, nor specific details at the product level. The study also does not consider short-term cyclicalities that might affect realized sales. The study, therefore, is strategic in nature, taking an aggregate and long-run view, irrespective of the players or products involved.

In this report we define the sales of cyber securities as including all commonly understood products and/or services falling within this broad category, irrespective of product packaging, formulation, size, or form. Companies participating in this industry include Accenture, ACE Group, ADACOM, Airbus Defence and Space, Akamai Technologies, AlgoSec, AlienVault, Alion Science and Technology, Alphabet, Amazon Web Services, Inc., AT&T, Autodesk, Avast, AVG Technologies, BAE Systems, Baraccuda Networks, Barbaricum, LLC, Baum, BitDefender, Blue Coat Systems, Boeing Defense, Space & Security, Booz Allen Hamilton, British Airways, Broadcom, Bull, CA Technologies, Capita, Carahsoft Technology, Carbon Black, Centrify, Check Point Software Technologies, Cisco, Cognizant, CommVerge Solutions, Computer Sciences, CrowdStrike, CSC, Cyber Ark Software, Ltd., CyberPolicy, Darktrace, Deep Root Analytics, Dell, Deloitte, Digital Shadows, DXC Technology Company, EMC Corporation, Equifax, Ernst&Young Global, Ltd., ESET, Exelis, Experian, F5 Networks, Facebook, Finmeccanica, FireEye, Forcepoint, Fortinet, F-Secure, GE, General Dynamics Corporation, Georgia Tech Applied Research Corporation, Google, Guidance Software, Hastings Direct, HCL Technologies, Herjavec Group, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Hitachi, Holiday Inn, Honeywell Process Solutions, Hootsuite, HPE, Huawei, IBM, Iboss, Identity Theft Guard Solutions, LLC, Imperva, Ingram Micro, Intel, InterContinental Hotels Group, International Business Machines (IBM), Isis Defence, Juniper Networks, Kaspersky, Kimpton Hotels, KIOSK Information Systems, KPMG, Kudu Dynamics, LLC, L-3 Communications Holdings, Landesk Software, Leidos, Lockheed Martin, Logrhythm, MacAfee, MacAulay-Brown, Inc., Maersk, Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, ManTech Advance Systems International, Inc., McAfee, Merck, Micro Focus, Netflix, NGC Group, Northrop Grumma, NTT Com Security, O2, Oak Ridge, Oce, Onyx Healthcare, Optiv Security, Orange, Palo Alto Networks, Panda Security, PLC, Pradeo Security Systems, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Professional Project Services, Inc., Proof Point, Quora, Radware, Rapid7, Raytheon, Resilient Systems, Rockwell Automation, Romstedt Technology Research Corporation, root9B, ROSNEFT, RSA Security, RUAG, SafeNet, Safran SA, Scalar Decisions, Inc., Secure Link, Sensato, Sierra Nevada, SMS Data Products Group, Inc., Solers, SonicWALL, Sophos, Splunk, Sqrrl Data, SurfRight, Symante, TASC, Inc., Tata Consultancy Services, Telos, Thales Group, The Boeing Company, Trend Micro, Tripwire, True North Automation, Under Armor, Utilidata, Vencore Labs, Inc., Veracode, Verisign, Verizon, Visa, VMware, Vormetric, WatchGuard, Waterfall Security Solutions, Webroot, Willis Group Holdings, Wipro, Wyle Laboratories, X Technologies, Inc., Yahoo!, Zscaler, Inc. (United States), and Zurich Insurance. In addition to the sources indicated, additional information available to the public via news and/or press releases published by players in the industry was considered in defining and calibrating this category. All figures are in a common currency (U.S. dollars, millions) and are not adjusted for inflation (i.e., they are current values). Exchange rates used to convert to U.S. dollars are averages for the year in question. Future exchange rates are assumed to be constant in the future at the current level (the average of the year of this publication's release in 2022).

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW
1.2 WHAT IS LATENT DEMAND AND THE P.I.E.?
1.3 THE METHODOLOGY
  1.3.1 STEP 1. PRODUCT DEFINITION AND DATA COLLECTION
  1.3.2 STEP 2. FILTERING AND SMOOTHING
  1.3.3 STEP 3. FILLING IN MISSING VALUES
  1.3.4 STEP 4. VARYING PARAMETER, NON-LINEAR ESTIMATION
  1.3.5 STEP 5. FIXED-PARAMETER LINEAR ESTIMATION
  1.3.6 STEP 6. AGGREGATION AND BENCHMARKING
1.4 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
  1.4.1 CATEGORY DEFINITION
  1.4.2 UNITS
  1.4.3 METHODOLOGY

2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

2.1 LATENT DEMAND IN THE UNITED STATES
2.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR IN THE UNITED STATES
2.3 TOP 100 CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

3 FAR WEST

3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - ALASKA
3.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - ALASKA
3.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - CALIFORNIA
3.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - CALIFORNIA
3.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - HAWAII
3.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - HAWAII
3.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEVADA
3.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEVADA
3.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - OREGON
3.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - OREGON
3.12 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - WASHINGTON
3.13 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - WASHINGTON

4 GREAT LAKES

4.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - ILLINOIS
4.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - ILLINOIS
4.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - INDIANA
4.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - INDIANA
4.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MICHIGAN
4.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MICHIGAN
4.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - OHIO
4.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - OHIO
4.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - WISCONSIN
4.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - WISCONSIN

5 MID-ATLANTIC

5.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
5.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - DELAWARE
5.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - DELAWARE
5.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
5.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
5.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MARYLAND
5.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MARYLAND
5.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEW JERSEY
5.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEW JERSEY
5.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEW YORK
5.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEW YORK
5.12 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - PENNSYLVANIA
5.13 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - PENNSYLVANIA

6 NEW ENGLAND

6.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
6.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - CONNECTICUT
6.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - CONNECTICUT
6.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MAINE
6.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MAINE
6.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MASSACHUSETTS
6.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MASSACHUSETTS
6.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEW HAMPSHIRE
6.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEW HAMPSHIRE
6.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - RHODE ISLAND
6.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - RHODE ISLAND
6.12 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - VERMONT
6.13 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - VERMONT

7 PLAINS

7.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - IOWA
7.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - IOWA
7.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - KANSAS
7.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - KANSAS
7.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MINNESOTA
7.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MINNESOTA
7.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MISSOURI
7.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MISSOURI
7.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEBRASKA
7.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEBRASKA
7.12 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NORTH DAKOTA
7.13 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NORTH DAKOTA
7.14 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - SOUTH DAKOTA
7.15 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - SOUTH DAKOTA

8 ROCKIES

8.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
8.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - COLORADO
8.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - COLORADO
8.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - IDAHO
8.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - IDAHO
8.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MONTANA
8.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MONTANA
8.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - UTAH
8.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - UTAH
8.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - WYOMING
8.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - WYOMING

9 SOUTHEAST

9.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - ALABAMA
9.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - ALABAMA
9.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - ARKANSAS
9.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - ARKANSAS
9.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - FLORIDA
9.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - FLORIDA
9.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - GEORGIA
9.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - GEORGIA
9.10 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - KENTUCKY
9.11 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - KENTUCKY
9.12 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - LOUISIANA
9.13 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - LOUISIANA
9.14 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - MISSISSIPPI
9.15 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - MISSISSIPPI
9.16 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NORTH CAROLINA
9.17 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NORTH CAROLINA
9.18 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - SOUTH CAROLINA
9.19 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - SOUTH CAROLINA
9.20 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - TENNESSEE
9.21 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - TENNESSEE
9.22 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - VIRGINIA
9.23 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - VIRGINIA
9.24 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - WEST VIRGINIA
9.25 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - WEST VIRGINIA

10 SOUTHWEST

10.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
10.2 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - ARIZONA
10.3 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - ARIZONA
10.4 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - NEW MEXICO
10.5 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - NEW MEXICO
10.6 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - OKLAHOMA
10.7 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - OKLAHOMA
10.8 LATENT DEMAND BY YEAR - TEXAS
10.9 CITIES SORTED BY ZIPCODE - TEXAS

11 DISCLAIMERS, WARRANTIES, AND USER AGREEMENT PROVISIONS

11.1 DISCLAIMERS & SAFE HARBOR
11.2 ICON GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC. USER AGREEMENT PROVISIONS