--- title: "GCL vs Runergy - Brand Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare GCL vs Runergy solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background." source: "https://comparepv.com/gcl-vs-runergy" --- # GCL vs Runergy GCL has the broader catalog (232 vs 124 models). GCL leads on peak efficiency at 24.50%. Runergy leans bifacial (77% of lineup). ## The two companies | Attribute | GCL | Runergy | | --- | --- | --- | | Country | China | China | | Headquarters | Suzhou/Hong Kong | Yancheng, Jiangsu Province | | Founded | 1990 | 2013 | | Employees | 6000+ | 15,000 | | Annual capacity | 30+ GW/year | 23GW (module capacity), 63GW (cell capacity) GW/year | | Tier 1 | yes | yes | | Listed | Hong Kong Stock Exchange/Shenzhen Stock Exchange: 03800.HK/002506.SZ | | | Website | [http://www.gcltech.com/](http://www.gcltech.com/) | [http://www.runergy.com](http://www.runergy.com) | GCL is a global company focusing on green energy and high-efficiency photovoltaic materials. They are known for their innovation in polysilicon and wafer technologies, with a focus on low-carbon solutions. GCL is committed to building a low-carbon PV value chain and advancing global clean energy transformation. Runergy is a global leader in solar technology, specializing in the R&D and production of high-efficiency solar cells and modules. The company is committed to innovation, quality, and providing a transparent and efficient supply chain to meet the growing global demand for clean energy. They have established production... ## Catalog & Power | Measure | GCL | Runergy | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Panel Models | 232 | 124 | +108 | | Max Power | 740 W | 740 W | | | Avg Power | 558 W | 579 W | +21 W | ## Efficiency | Measure | GCL | Runergy | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Max Efficiency | 24.50% | 24.10% | +0.40 pp | | Avg Efficiency | 22.03% | 22.42% | +0.39 pp | ## Reliability & Warranty | Measure | GCL | Runergy | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.320%/°C | -0.298%/°C | +0.022 | | Bifacial Share | 151 (65%) | 95 (77%) | +12 pp | | Avg Warranty | 28.4 yrs | 29.1 yrs | +0.7 yr | ## Efficiency distribution Runergy skews to higher efficiency: 33% of lineup is 23%+ | Efficiency band | GCL | Runergy | | --- | --- | --- | | \<20% | 2 (0.9%) | 0 | | 20-21% | 43 (18.5%) | 9 (7.3%) | | 21-22% | 73 (31.5%) | 26 (21.0%) | | 22-23% | 48 (20.7%) | 48 (38.7%) | | 23%+ | 66 (28.4%) | 41 (33.1%) | ## Power distribution Runergy offers more 600W+ panels (48% of lineup) | Power band | GCL | Runergy | | --- | --- | --- | | \<400W | 6 (2.6%) | 0 | | 400-499W | 60 (25.9%) | 36 (29.0%) | | 500-599W | 63 (27.2%) | 28 (22.6%) | | 600-699W | 81 (34.9%) | 35 (28.2%) | | 700W+ | 22 (9.5%) | 25 (20.2%) | ## Cell technology Dominant cell tech: **TOPCon** (47%) Dominant cell tech: **N-type** (60%) | Technology | GCL | Runergy | | --- | --- | --- | | TOPCon | 108 (46.6%) | 0 | | PERC | 102 (44.0%) | 32 (25.8%) | | N-type | 10 (4.3%) | 74 (59.7%) | | HJT | 7 (3.0%) | 18 (14.5%) | | BIPV | 5 (2.2%) | 0 | ## Top panels, GCL | # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 2 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 3 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-730) | 730 | 23.5 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 4 | [NT12/66GDF-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-nt12-66gdf-730) | 730 | 23.5 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 5 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF-725](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-725) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 6 | [NT12/66GDF-725](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-nt12-66gdf-725) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 7 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF 725](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-725-1) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 8 | [GCL-NH12/66GDF-720](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nh12-66gdf-720) | 720 | 23.2 | -0.240 | Monocrystalline | | 9 | [GCL-NT12/66GDF-720](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-gcl-nt12-66gdf-720) | 720 | 23.2 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 10 | [NT12/66GDF-720](https://comparepv.com/panel/gcl-nt12-66gdf-720) | 720 | 23.2 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | ## Top panels, Runergy | # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | [HY-DH132H10-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 2 | [HY-DH132H10-Plus-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 3 | [HY-DH132H10-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 4 | [HY-DH132H10-Plus-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 5 | [HY-DH132H10-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-730) | 730 | 23.5 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 6 | [HY-DH132N10-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132n10-730) | 730 | 23.5 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 7 | [HY-DH132H10-Plus-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-730) | 730 | 23.5 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 8 | [HY-DH132H10-725](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-725) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | | 9 | [HY-DH132N10-725](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132n10-725) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 10 | [HY-DH132H10-Plus-725](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-725) | 725 | 23.3 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline | ## Summary GCL, operating through its module manufacturing arm GCL System Integration Technology Co., Ltd., is a Chinese solar manufacturer that forms part of the broader GCL Group - one of China's largest energy conglomerates with a long-standing presence across the solar value chain. By shipment volume, GCL SI ranks among the global top ten module manufacturers, having delivered approximately 25 GW of modules in 2024 against a total installed module capacity of around 30 GW. The company recorded an 83% capacity utilization rate in 2024, among the highest in the industry. Its Tier 1 bankability status under BloombergNEF is cited inconsistently across available sources, and buyers financing projects through institutional lenders should verify acceptance with their specific bank or project financier. Runergy, formally Jiangsu Runergy New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., is headquartered in Yancheng, China, and was founded in 2013. The company built its reputation primarily as a cell manufacturer, ranking among the global top three in cell shipments for three consecutive years between 2020 and 2022, with cumulative cell shipments exceeding 65 GW by end of 2023. Runergy has held BloombergNEF Tier 1 PV Module Maker status for six consecutive quarters, providing clear bankability assurance for project finance. In terms of institutional footprint for module supply specifically, GCL holds a larger market share, while Runergy carries a stronger verified Tier 1 credential. GCL SI's current product focus is N-type TOPCon technology, with its GPC 2.0 flagship series reaching 660 W output and a verified cell efficiency of 27.5%, alongside a back-contact module line launched in early 2025. The portfolio spans utility-scale ground-mount, floating solar, agrivoltaic systems, and BIPV applications, making GCL a versatile choice for large developers. Runergy's module lineup is also anchored in N-type TOPCon, with the third generation achieving a cell conversion efficiency of 26.9% as verified by Germany's Fraunhofer Institute. The company is actively developing HJT and back-contact cell technologies for future product cycles. A key differentiator for international buyers is Runergy's 2 GW module manufacturing facility in Huntsville, Alabama, which began full production in 2024 and serves projects requiring non-Chinese supply chains under IRA or procurement policy constraints. For most international utility or commercial buyers, both GCL and Runergy are credible N-type TOPCon suppliers operating at significant scale. Runergy's confirmed BNEF Tier 1 status gives it a clearer edge in bankable project finance contexts, while GCL's larger overall module shipment volume and broader product diversity suit developers managing high procurement volumes or requiring specialized form factors such as BIPV or agrivoltaic modules. Where neither policy nor financing imposes a preference, the two can be treated as broadly interchangeable, with selection driven by price, delivery terms, and local distributor support. Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above. ## Other comparisons - [GCL vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/gcl-vs-a-b-energy) - [AE Solar vs Runergy](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-runergy) - [GCL vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/gcl-vs-aeet) - [AIKO vs Runergy](https://comparepv.com/aiko-vs-runergy) - [GCL vs AKCOME](https://comparepv.com/gcl-vs-akcome) - [ARTsolar vs Runergy](https://comparepv.com/artsolar-vs-runergy) --- Source: https://comparepv.com/gcl-vs-runergy Not in this file, on the page: the distributions above drawn as charts.