ASM vs Topsky Energy - solar panel manufacturer comparison
ASM has the broader catalog (1 vs 0 models).
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
Australian Solar Manufacturing (ASM) is a small Australian solar panel assembler that produces crystalline monocrystalline modules domestically using components sourced from Germany, Japan, the USA, and China. The company focuses on providing locally assembled PV modules tailored to Australian conditions, supporting...
- Founded
- 2009
- Headquarters
- Hallam, Victoria, Australia
- Employees
- 1-10
Shenzhen Topsky Energy Co., Ltd. is a Chinese manufacturer of solar cells and photovoltaic modules, including lightweight and customized panels. The company operates production facilities in Zhejiang and Jiangsu provinces, with sales and marketing based in Shenzhen and Hong Kong. Its products are distributed to over...
- Founded
- 1998
- Headquarters
- Shenzhen, China
- Annual capacity
- <1 GW/year
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
The flagships
Written summary
ASM, operating as Australian Solar Manufacturing Pty Ltd, is a small Australian manufacturer with a modest domestic footprint. The company's listed catalog on industry directories such as ENF Solar features monocrystalline panels in the 170 W-200 W range, wattages that reflect an older product generation. No current evidence from publicly available sources places ASM on the BloombergNEF Tier 1 list, and no independently confirmed annual production figure in gigawatts has been published. Topsky Energy, formally Shenzhen Topsky Energy Co., Ltd., is a Chinese manufacturer headquartered in Shenzhen and established in 1998. The company exports to a claimed presence across more than 150 countries, holds TUV Rhineland and CE certifications, and lists panels spanning a considerably wider power range. Neither brand carries confirmed Tier 1 bankability status, but Topsky Energy has the broader international commercial footprint of the two.
In terms of product families, ASM appears oriented toward small residential rooftop installations in the Australian market, with no publicly confirmed lineup of modern high-wattage or bifacial modules. Topsky Energy, by contrast, offers a more varied catalog that - according to its own published materials, corroborated by industry directory listings - covers mono PERC modules for ground-mount and flat-roof projects, as well as HJT and TOPCon lines reaching into the 600 W-plus range. The HJT offering in particular targets buyers prioritising low temperature coefficients and strong low-light performance, while the PERC line is positioned as a cost-accessible option for utility and commercial ground-mount work.
For a typical buyer in 2025 sourcing panels outside Australia, Topsky Energy is the more practical choice by default, given its broader product range, wider distribution, and more up-to-date cell technology options. ASM may remain relevant for buyers with a specific preference for domestically manufactured Australian product, but the scarcity of independent reviews and the apparent age of its public catalog suggest that due diligence - including direct contact with the manufacturer - is warranted before committing to a project.
Generated by Claude Sonnet · 2026-06-08
Other brand comparisons
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.