AIKO vs Pylontech - solar panel manufacturer comparison
AIKO has the broader catalog (144 vs 0 models). AIKO leans bifacial (24% of lineup).
Both catalogues are read from the manufacturers' own datasheets. A brand is not scored against the market here, only against the other brand on this page.
The two companies
- Founded
- 2009
- Headquarters
- Shanghai, China
- Listed
- SZSE: 600732
- Tier 1 bankable
- Yes
Pylontech is a leading battery energy storage system (BESS) provider, specializing in lithium iron phosphate technology. They offer solutions for residential, commercial, and utility-scale applications, integrating expertise in electrochemistry, power electronics, and system integration. The company is dedicated to...
- Founded
- 2009
- Headquarters
- Shanghai, China
- Annual capacity
- 7-8.5 (in 2022) GW/year
- Employees
- 2,114
- Tier 1 bankable
- Yes
Catalogue against catalogue
An average over a catalogue describes the range a manufacturer publishes, not the module you would buy. A brand with two flagship panels and eighty older ones averages worse than one that has retired its back catalogue.
What each of them builds
AIKO skews to higher efficiency: 85% of lineup is 23%+
AIKO offers more 600W+ panels (60% of lineup)
Dominant cell tech: <strong>Back Contact</strong> (83%)
The flagships
Written summary
Pylontech is a Chinese energy storage manufacturer headquartered in Shanghai, founded in 2009 and listed on China's STAR Market in 2020. It is a dedicated battery energy storage system (BESS) company and does not manufacture solar panels; its role in the solar value chain is supplying the storage half of a PV-plus-storage installation. As of Q2 2026, Pylontech holds BloombergNEF Tier 1 status as an energy storage manufacturer - a recognition it earned on criteria including large-scale project execution, financial credibility, and product reliability - and reports over 13 GWh of annual production capacity. AIKO, also a Chinese company, is a true solar module manufacturer; it achieved BloombergNEF Tier 1 status on the solar panel side and has grown to roughly 20 GW of annual module capacity, placing it among the mid-to-upper tier of Chinese panel producers by volume. In terms of institutional footprint, Pylontech's STAR Market listing and decade-plus track record give it slightly broader financial visibility, though AIKO is closing that gap quickly.
Because the two companies operate in different product segments, a direct comparison is most useful at the system level. Pylontech's product families - the US series and Force H1 line of lithium iron phosphate (LFP) rack batteries - are aimed at residential, commercial, and utility-scale storage, and are specifically designed to pair with a wide range of third-party inverters from brands such as SMA, Victron, and Growatt. AIKO's modules, built on its proprietary All Back Contact (ABC) cell technology, target buyers who prioritize peak efficiency and roof-space constraints; independent tests and the 2025 SolarQuotes Installers' Choice Award reflect strong real-world performance, and AIKO has claimed world-record mass-produced module efficiency above 24%. Its 30-year performance warranty is notably longer than the 25-year standard common among peers.
For a buyer planning a complete solar-plus-storage system, these brands are not competitors but potential partners - AIKO on the panels, Pylontech on the battery. If forced to evaluate each on its own segment, AIKO stands out as a high-efficiency panel choice for space-constrained residential or premium commercial rooftops, while Pylontech is a well-established, bankable default for LFP storage where inverter compatibility and proven large-scale deployments matter. Neither brand should be dismissed; both carry Tier 1 institutional recognition in their respective categories.
Generated by Claude Sonnet · 2026-05-14
Other brand comparisons
Shop prices: See 179 AIKO offers
Comparisons are computed from manufacturer datasheets held in the ComparePV database and may not reflect a brand's complete current lineup. Nothing on this page is paid placement.