---
title: "Jolywood vs ZNShine - Brand Comparison | ComparePV"
description: "Compare Jolywood vs ZNShine solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background."
source: "https://comparepv.com/jolywood-vs-znshine"
image: "https://comparepv.com/og/compare/manufacturers/jolywood/znshine.png"
---

# Jolywood vs ZNShine

ZNShine has the broader catalog (212 vs 128 models). Jolywood leads on peak efficiency at 23.60%. Jolywood leans bifacial (86% of lineup).


## The two companies


| Attribute | Jolywood | ZNShine |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Country | China | China |
| Headquarters | Taizhou | Suqian |
| Founded | 2008 | 1988 |
| Employees |  | 1,200 |
| Annual capacity |  | 10 GW/year |
| Tier 1 | yes | yes |
| Listed | SZSE: 300393 | NEEQ: 838463 |
| Website | [https://www.jolywood.cn](https://www.jolywood.cn) | [http://www.znshinesolar.com](http://www.znshinesolar.com) |

ZNShine Solar is a high-tech PV enterprise specializing in R&D, manufacturing, and sales of solar modules. They also provide integrated photovoltaic, battery storage, and green hydrogen solutions, as well as BIPV, rooftop solar, and utility-scale solar solutions with a commitment to boosting green electricity...


## Catalog & Power


| Measure | Jolywood | ZNShine | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Panel Models | 128 | 212 | +84 |
| Max Power | 715 W | 670 W | +45 W |
| Avg Power | 554 W | 535 W | +19 W |


## Efficiency


| Measure | Jolywood | ZNShine | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Max Efficiency | 23.60% | 22.83% | +0.77 pp |
| Avg Efficiency | 22.54% | 21.35% | +1.20 pp |


## Reliability & Warranty


| Measure | Jolywood | ZNShine | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.284%/°C | -0.329%/°C | +0.045 |
| Bifacial Share | 110 (86%) | 89 (42%) | +44 pp |
| Avg Warranty | 30.0 yrs | 28.3 yrs | +1.7 yr |


## Efficiency distribution

Jolywood skews to higher efficiency: 22% of lineup is 23%+


| Efficiency band | Jolywood | ZNShine |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 21-22% | 11 (8.6%) | 101 (47.6%) |
| 22-23% | 89 (69.5%) | 47 (22.2%) |
| 23%+ | 28 (21.9%) | 0 |
| \<20% | 0 | 5 (2.4%) |
| 20-21% | 0 | 59 (27.8%) |


## Power distribution

Jolywood offers more 600W+ panels (38% of lineup)


| Power band | Jolywood | ZNShine |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 400-499W | 42 (32.8%) | 64 (30.2%) |
| 500-599W | 38 (29.7%) | 99 (46.7%) |
| 600-699W | 40 (31.2%) | 43 (20.3%) |
| 700W+ | 8 (6.2%) | 0 |
| \<400W | 0 | 6 (2.8%) |


## Cell technology

Dominant cell tech: TOPCon (95%)

Dominant cell tech: PERC (63%)


| Technology | Jolywood | ZNShine |
| --- | --- | --- |
| TOPCon | 122 (95.3%) | 78 (36.8%) |
| N-type | 6 (4.7%) | 0 |
| PERC | 0 | 134 (63.2%) |


## Top panels, Jolywood


| # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | [JW-HD132N-715W](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-715w) | 715 | 23.0 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 2 | [JW-HD132N-715](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-715) | 715 | 23.0 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 3 | [JW-HD132N-710W](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-710w) | 710 | 22.9 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 4 | [JW-HD132N-710](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-710) | 710 | 22.9 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 5 | [JW-HD132N-705W](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-705w) | 705 | 22.7 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 6 | [JW-HD132N-705](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-705) | 705 | 22.7 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 7 | [JW-HD132N-700](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-700) | 700 | 22.5 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 8 | [JW-HD132N-700W](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-700w) | 700 | 22.5 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 9 | [JW-HD132N-695](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-695) | 695 | 22.4 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |
| 10 | [JW-HD132N-695W](https://comparepv.com/panel/jolywood-taizhou-solar-technology-co-ltd-jw-hd132n-695w) | 695 | 22.4 | -0.280 | Monocrystalline |


## Top panels, ZNShine


| # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | [ZXM8-TP132-670W](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tp132-670w) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 2 | [ZXM8-TPLD132-670](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpld132-670) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 3 | [ZXM8-TPLDD132-670](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpldd132-670) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 4 | [ZXM8-TP132-670](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tp132-670) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 5 | [ZXM8-TPLD132-670W](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpld132-670w) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 6 | [ZXM8-TP132-665W](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tp132-665w) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 7 | [ZXM8-TPLD132-665](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpld132-665) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 8 | [ZXM8-TPLDD132-665](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpldd132-665) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 9 | [ZXM8-TPLD132-665W](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tpld132-665w) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |
| 10 | [ZXM8-TP132-665](https://comparepv.com/panel/znshine-zxm8-tp132-665) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline |


## Summary

Jolywood is a Chinese solar manufacturer based in Jiangsu province, founded in 2008 and widely credited as the first company to bring N-type TOPCon cells into mass production, a milestone achieved by its Taizhou subsidiary in 2016. The company holds BloombergNEF Tier 1 bankable status and has built cell production capacity of close to 20 GW, with module output capacity of around 10 GW per year. Its third-party recognition is extensive - two PV Magazine Awards, consistent PVEL Top Performer status across multiple scorecard categories, EUPD Top Brand designation, and a TUV Rheinland quality award. ZNShine (ZNSHINE PV-TECH Co., Ltd.) traces its industrial roots to 1988, entering the photovoltaic business in 2006, which makes it one of the longer-established participants in the sector. It has held BloombergNEF Tier 1 status without interruption since 2015 and operates three production bases in China - Changzhou, Suqian, and Dali - with combined module capacity estimated at approximately 10 GW. ZNShine received a B rating in PV Tech's bankability ranking and has partnered with Munich Re for PV warranty insurance, a feature that resonates with risk-averse project finance teams. On institutional footprint, Jolywood carries a broader portfolio of independent validations, while ZNShine's longer Tier 1 tenure gives it a track record advantage with conservative lenders.

Jolywood's product range is built around two N-type cell architectures: TOPCon and HJT. Its TOPCon cells set a certified world efficiency record of 26.7% in 2023, and module-level efficiencies of up to 23.2% have been independently confirmed. These attributes make Jolywood panels a strong fit for space-constrained residential rooftops, commercial and industrial installations where watts per square metre matter, and utility-scale ground-mount projects where bifacial gain and low long-term degradation are priorities. ZNShine offers a broader product mix spanning traditional monocrystalline formats through to N-type TOPCon bifacial modules rated at up to 22.5% efficiency, backed by a 12-year product warranty and 25- or 30-year performance guarantees depending on glass configuration.

For most international buyers, Jolywood is the stronger default when cutting-edge cell technology, a clear N-type product roadmap, and a heavyweight certification record are the deciding factors. ZNShine is a credible Tier 1 alternative - particularly appealing when Munich Re warranty backing, multi-technology supply flexibility, or a long unbroken bankability history carry more weight than technology differentiation. The two brands are not fully interchangeable given Jolywood's clearer innovation leadership, but for standard commercial projects where Tier 1 status is the minimum bar, both qualify without significant risk differential.

Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above.


## Other comparisons

- [Jolywood vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/jolywood-vs-a-b-energy)
- [AE Solar vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-znshine)
- [Jolywood vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/jolywood-vs-aeet)
- [AIKO vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/aiko-vs-znshine)
- [Jolywood vs AKCOME](https://comparepv.com/jolywood-vs-akcome)
- [ARTsolar vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/artsolar-vs-znshine)


---

Source: https://comparepv.com/jolywood-vs-znshine

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