---
title: "Gokin vs AEET - Brand Comparison | ComparePV"
description: "Compare Gokin vs AEET solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background."
source: "https://comparepv.com/gokin-vs-aeet"
---

# Gokin vs AEET

Gokin has the broader catalog (44 vs 5 models). Gokin leads on peak efficiency at 24.50%. Gokin leans bifacial (11% of lineup).


## The two companies


| Attribute | Gokin | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Country |  |  |
| Headquarters |  |  |
| Founded |  |  |
| Employees |  |  |
| Annual capacity |  |  |
| Tier 1 | no | no |
| Listed |  |  |
| Website |  |  |


## Catalog & Power


| Measure | Gokin | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Panel Models | 44 | 5 | +39 |
| Max Power | 780 W | 200 W | +580 W |
| Avg Power | 517 W | 190 W | +327 W |


## Efficiency


| Measure | Gokin | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Max Efficiency | 24.50% | 15.70% | +8.80 pp |
| Avg Efficiency | 23.58% | 14.90% | +8.68 pp |


## Reliability & Warranty


| Measure | Gokin | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.260%/°C | - |  |
| Bifacial Share | 5 (11%) | 0 (0%) | +11 pp |
| Avg Warranty | 30.0 yrs | 25.0 yrs | +5.0 yr |


## Efficiency distribution

Gokin skews to higher efficiency: 82% of lineup is 23%+


| Efficiency band | Gokin | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 22-23% | 8 (18.2%) | 0 |
| 23%+ | 36 (81.8%) | 0 |
| \<20% | 0 | 5 (100.0%) |


## Power distribution

Gokin offers more 600W+ panels (11% of lineup)


| Power band | Gokin | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 400-499W | 28 (63.6%) | 0 |
| 500-599W | 11 (25.0%) | 0 |
| 700W+ | 5 (11.4%) | 0 |
| \<400W | 0 | 5 (100.0%) |


## Cell technology

Dominant cell tech: **Back Contact** (100%)

Dominant cell tech: **PERC** (100%)


| Technology | Gokin | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Back Contact | 44 (100.0%) | 0 |
| PERC | 0 | 5 (100.0%) |


## Top panels, Gokin


| # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | [GK-4-78HGBD-780M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-4-78hgbd-780m) | 780 | 24.3 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 2 | [GK-4-78HGBD-775M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-4-78hgbd-775m) | 775 | 24.1 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 3 | [GK-4-78HGBD-770M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-4-78hgbd-770m) | 770 | 24.0 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 4 | [GK-4-78HGBD-765M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-4-78hgbd-765m) | 765 | 23.8 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 5 | [GK-4-78HGBD-760M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-4-78hgbd-760m) | 760 | 23.7 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 6 | [GK-5-60HG-540M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-5-60hg-540m) | 540 | 24.4 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 7 | [GK-5-60HG-535M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-5-60hg-535m) | 535 | 24.1 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 8 | [GK-5-60HG-530M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-5-60hg-530m) | 530 | 23.9 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 9 | [GK-5-60HG-525M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-5-60hg-525m) | 525 | 23.7 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 10 | [GK-5-60HG-520M](https://comparepv.com/panel/gokin-gk-5-60hg-520m) | 520 | 23.5 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |


## Top panels, AEET


| # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | [SE200M(24)F](https://comparepv.com/panel/aeet-se200m-24-f) | 200 | 15.7 | - | Monocrystalline |
| 2 | [SE195M(24)F](https://comparepv.com/panel/aeet-se195m-24-f) | 195 | 15.3 | - | Monocrystalline |
| 3 | [SE190M(24)F](https://comparepv.com/panel/aeet-se190m-24-f) | 190 | 14.9 | - | Monocrystalline |
| 4 | [SE185M(24)F](https://comparepv.com/panel/aeet-se185m-24-f) | 185 | 14.5 | - | Monocrystalline |
| 5 | [SE180M(24)F](https://comparepv.com/panel/aeet-se180m-24-f) | 180 | 14.1 | - | Monocrystalline |


## Summary

AEET Energy Group GmbH is a small Germany-based photovoltaic wholesale distributor rather than a vertically integrated manufacturer with significant production capacity. The company markets a compact lineup of five panels and does not hold Tier 1 bankable status, reflecting its limited scale and institutional footprint. Gokin Solar, founded in 2019 and headquartered in China, is a newer but considerably more ambitious entrant, built around high-efficiency back-contact (BC) module technology. Gokin is not yet classified as Tier 1 bankable either, though it holds IEC 61215:2021 and IEC 61730:2023 certifications from TUV Rheinland and has been expanding steadily into European markets including Germany, Italy, and Spain. On the dimension of portfolio depth and institutional presence, Gokin leads clearly: its 44-panel catalog is nearly nine times the size of AEET's offering.

The technical performance gap between these two lineups is wide. AEET's portfolio averages 190 Wp per panel and 14.9% efficiency, with a ceiling of 200 Wp and 15.7% - figures that sit well below today's mainstream crystalline silicon benchmarks. The underlying cell technology is unclassified, no bifacial options are available, and warranty coverage extends to 25 years. Gokin's catalog, by contrast, averages 517 Wp and 23.6% efficiency, peaking at 780 Wp and 24.5%, with back-contact cells representing roughly 80% of the range. Approximately 11% of Gokin's panels are bifacial, and the average power temperature coefficient is a low -0.26% per degree Celsius, which is meaningful in warm climates. Gokin also offers a 30-year warranty. AEET's low-wattage panels may suit niche legacy retrofits or buyers with space-unconstrained, budget-sensitive small residential projects, while Gokin's dense, high-output modules are engineered for premium residential rooftops, commercial rooftop installations, and utility-scale ground mounts.

For virtually any buyer making new procurement decisions in 2025, Gokin is the stronger default on every measurable dimension - power density, conversion efficiency, warranty length, and technology generation. AEET offers no clear advantage unless a buyer has a specific legacy size constraint or an existing supply relationship. Both manufacturers lack Tier 1 bankable status, meaning either choice would require additional lender scrutiny for project-financed work, so neither has an edge there.

\---LINKS---

\- https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/12/15/gokin-solar-launches-new-back-contact-solar-module-series/ \| Gokin Solar launches new back-contact solar module series \| article

\- https://www.pv-tech.org/industry-updates/gokin-solar-aiko-elevate-strategic-partnership-in-back-contact-technology/ \| Gokin Solar and AIKO elevate strategic back-contact technology partnership \| article

\- https://www.enfsolar.com/aeet \| AEET Energy Group GmbH - ENF Solar manufacturer directory entry \| review

Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above.


## Other comparisons

- [Gokin vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/gokin-vs-a-b-energy)
- [AE Solar vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-aeet)
- [Gokin vs AIKO](https://comparepv.com/gokin-vs-aiko)
- [AKCOME vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/akcome-vs-aeet)
- [Gokin vs ARTsolar](https://comparepv.com/gokin-vs-artsolar)
- [ASM vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/asm-vs-aeet)


---

Source: https://comparepv.com/gokin-vs-aeet

Not in this file, on the page: the distributions above drawn as charts.