--- title: "Kyocera vs AEET - Brand Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Kyocera vs AEET solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background." source: "https://comparepv.com/kyocera-vs-aeet" --- # Kyocera vs AEET Kyocera has the broader catalog (8 vs 5 models). Kyocera leads on peak efficiency at 21.00%. ## The two companies | Attribute | Kyocera | AEET | | --- | --- | --- | | Country | Japan | | | Headquarters | Kyoto | | | Founded | 1959 | | | Employees | 77,136 | | | Annual capacity | | | | Tier 1 | | no | | Listed | TYO: 6971 | | | Website | [https://global.kyocera.com](https://global.kyocera.com) | | Kyocera Corporation is a Japanese multinational electronics and ceramics manufacturer. Founded in 1959, the company produces a diverse range of products, including industrial ceramics, solar power generating systems, telecommunications equipment, and office document imaging equipment. Kyocera is committed to... ## Catalog & Power | Measure | Kyocera | AEET | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Panel Models | 8 | 5 | +3 | | Max Power | 410 W | 200 W | +210 W | | Avg Power | 302 W | 190 W | +112 W | ## Efficiency | Measure | Kyocera | AEET | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Max Efficiency | 21.00% | 15.70% | +5.30 pp | | Avg Efficiency | 18.21% | 14.90% | +3.31 pp | ## Reliability & Warranty | Measure | Kyocera | AEET | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.460%/°C | - | | | Bifacial Share | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | | | Avg Warranty | 25.0 yrs | 25.0 yrs | | ## Efficiency distribution | Efficiency band | Kyocera | AEET | | --- | --- | --- | | \<20% | 5 (62.5%) | 5 (100.0%) | | 20-21% | 1 (12.5%) | 0 | | 21-22% | 2 (25.0%) | 0 | ## Power distribution | Power band | Kyocera | AEET | | --- | --- | --- | | \<400W | 6 (75.0%) | 5 (100.0%) | | 400-499W | 2 (25.0%) | 0 | ## Cell technology Dominant cell tech: **PERC** (100%) | Technology | Kyocera | AEET | | --- | --- | --- | | Unknown | 8 (100.0%) | 0 | | PERC | 0 | 5 (100.0%) | ## Top panels, Kyocera | # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | [KT410W-108HL4](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kt410w-108hl4) | 410 | 21.0 | - | Monocrystalline | | 2 | [KT410W-108HL4B](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kt410w-108hl4b) | 410 | 21.0 | - | Monocrystalline | | 3 | [KK280P-3CD3CG](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kk280p-3cd3cg) | 280 | 17.0 | - | Polycrystalline | | 4 | [KK275P-3CD3CG](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kk275p-3cd3cg) | 275 | 16.7 | - | Polycrystalline | | 5 | [KU270-6MCA](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-ku270-6mca) | 270 | 16.4 | -0.460 | Polycrystalline | | 6 | [KU270-6MPA](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-ku270-6mpa) | 270 | 16.4 | -0.460 | Polycrystalline | | 7 | [KK270P-3CD3CG](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kk270p-3cd3cg) | 270 | 16.4 | - | Polycrystalline | | 8 | [KT230W-60HL4B](https://comparepv.com/panel/kyocera-kt230w-60hl4b) | 230 | 20.8 | - | 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 Germany-based photovoltaic wholesale partner and brand-label module supplier headquartered in Bad Gandersheim. The company sources panel manufacturing from established Asian production partners and markets modules under its own name, primarily targeting the European distribution channel. It is a modest-scale operation with no confirmed BloombergNEF Tier 1 listing in publicly available quarterly reports. Kyocera, by contrast, is a subsidiary of Kyocera Corporation, the Kyoto-founded Japanese conglomerate established in 1959 with decades of documented presence in photovoltaics. Kyocera Solar built a strong institutional track record across North America, Europe, and Asia before ceasing North American sales operations in 2016. Between the two, Kyocera historically carried the stronger institutional footprint, though that advantage belongs to a previous market era. On the product side, AEET offers crystalline silicon modules - including standard monocrystalline and polycrystalline variants - oriented toward residential and light commercial rooftop installations in European markets, typically competing on price within the mid-tier wholesale segment. Kyocera's legacy catalog, built around multicrystalline silicon cell technology, was similarly aimed at residential and small commercial rooftops, and the brand became notable for longevity: field data from Kyocera's Sakura test facility showed only 17.2% total degradation after more than 36 years of continuous operation, a figure cited by independent reviewers as evidence of the panels' durability even if their efficiency - historically in the 15-17% range - now lags behind modern standards of 20-24%. For a buyer evaluating new panel purchases in 2025, neither brand is a straightforward recommendation. AEET panels are available through European distributors and can be a cost-effective option for budget-conscious installers, but the lack of Tier 1 bankability confirmation limits their appeal for financed utility or large commercial projects. Kyocera is effectively no longer a live purchase option in most markets, making it relevant mainly to owners of existing systems seeking warranty service or compatible replacements. Buyers prioritizing current performance, bankability, and supply-chain certainty should look to active Tier 1 manufacturers rather than either of these two brands. \---LINKS--- \- https://www.enfsolar.com/aeet \| AEET Energy Group GmbH profile - ENF Solar directory \| article \- https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/are-kyocera-solar-panels-any-good \| Are Kyocera Solar Panels Any Good - SolarReviews \| review \- https://www.energysage.com/solar/best-solar-panels-complete-ranking/kyocera-solar-panels-complete-review/ \| Kyocera Solar Panels - Complete Review - EnergySage \| review \- https://solartechonline.com/blog/kyocera-solar-panels-review-guide/ \| Kyocera Solar Panels Review 2025 - Performance and Alternatives \| review Sources: \- \[AEET Energy Group GmbH - ENF Solar\](https://www.enfsolar.com/aeet) \- \[Are Kyocera Solar Panels Any Good - SolarReviews\](https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/are-kyocera-solar-panels-any-good) \- \[Kyocera Solar Panels Complete Review - EnergySage\](https://www.energysage.com/solar/best-solar-panels-complete-ranking/kyocera-solar-panels-complete-review/) \- \[Kyocera Solar Panels Review 2025 - SolarTechOnline\](https://solartechonline.com/blog/kyocera-solar-panels-review-guide/) Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above. ## Other comparisons - [Kyocera vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/kyocera-vs-a-b-energy) - [AE Solar vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-aeet) - [Kyocera vs AIKO](https://comparepv.com/kyocera-vs-aiko) - [AKCOME vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/akcome-vs-aeet) - [Kyocera vs ARTsolar](https://comparepv.com/kyocera-vs-artsolar) - [ASM vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/asm-vs-aeet) --- Source: https://comparepv.com/kyocera-vs-aeet Not in this file, on the page: the distributions above drawn as charts.