--- title: "Q-Cells vs ZNShine - Brand Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Q-Cells vs ZNShine solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background." source: "https://comparepv.com/q-cells-vs-znshine" --- # Q-Cells vs ZNShine ZNShine has the broader catalog (212 vs 89 models). Q-Cells leads on peak efficiency at 23.20%. ## The two companies | Attribute | Q-Cells | ZNShine | | --- | --- | --- | | Country | South Korea | China | | Headquarters | Seoul | Suqian | | Founded | 1999 | 1988 | | Employees | 2000+ | 1,200 | | Annual capacity | 11.2 GW/year | 10 GW/year | | Tier 1 | yes | yes | | Listed | NASDAQ: HQCL | NEEQ: 838463 | | Website | [https://www.qcells.com](https://www.qcells.com) | [http://www.znshinesolar.com](http://www.znshinesolar.com) | Qcells is a renowned global provider of complete energy solutions, specializing in solar cells and modules, energy storage solutions, downstream project business, and energy retail. The company has a strong heritage dating back to its foundation in Germany and has become a leader in technology innovations. As an... 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 | Q-Cells | ZNShine | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Panel Models | 89 | 212 | +123 | | Max Power | 675 W | 670 W | +5 W | | Avg Power | 468 W | 535 W | +66 W | ## Efficiency | Measure | Q-Cells | ZNShine | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Max Efficiency | 23.20% | 22.83% | +0.37 pp | | Avg Efficiency | 21.21% | 21.35% | +0.13 pp | ## Reliability & Warranty | Measure | Q-Cells | ZNShine | Margin | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.325%/°C | -0.329%/°C | +0.005 | | Bifacial Share | 35 (39%) | 89 (42%) | +3 pp | | Avg Warranty | 27.0 yrs | 28.3 yrs | +1.3 yr | ## Efficiency distribution Q-Cells skews to higher efficiency: 2% of lineup is 23%+ | Efficiency band | Q-Cells | ZNShine | | --- | --- | --- | | \<20% | 7 (7.9%) | 5 (2.4%) | | 20-21% | 29 (32.6%) | 59 (27.8%) | | 21-22% | 30 (33.7%) | 101 (47.6%) | | 22-23% | 21 (23.6%) | 47 (22.2%) | | 23%+ | 2 (2.2%) | 0 | ## Power distribution ZNShine offers more 600W+ panels (20% of lineup) | Power band | Q-Cells | ZNShine | | --- | --- | --- | | \<400W | 20 (22.5%) | 6 (2.8%) | | 400-499W | 41 (46.1%) | 64 (30.2%) | | 500-599W | 11 (12.4%) | 99 (46.7%) | | 600-699W | 17 (19.1%) | 43 (20.3%) | ## Cell technology Dominant cell tech: **PERC** (43%) Dominant cell tech: **PERC** (63%) | Technology | Q-Cells | ZNShine | | --- | --- | --- | | PERC | 38 (42.7%) | 134 (63.2%) | | N-type | 23 (25.8%) | 0 | | Unknown | 20 (22.5%) | 0 | | TOPCon | 8 (9.0%) | 78 (36.8%) | ## Top panels, Q-Cells | # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 675](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-675) | 675 | 21.7 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 2 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 670](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-670) | 670 | 21.6 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 3 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 665](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-665) | 665 | 21.4 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 4 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 660](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-660) | 660 | 21.2 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 5 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 655](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-655) | 655 | 21.1 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 6 | [Q.PEAK DUO ML-G12S.3 / BFG 650](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-peak-duo-ml-g12s-3-bfg-650) | 650 | 20.9 | -0.340 | Monocrystalline | | 7 | [Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 645](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-tron-xl-g2-3-bfg-645) | 645 | 23.1 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 8 | [Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 640](https://comparepv.com/panel/q-cells-q-tron-xl-g2-3-bfg-640) | 640 | 22.9 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline | | 9 | [Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 635](https://comparepv.com/panel/hanwha-q-cells-america-inc-q-tron-xl-g2-3-bfg-635) | 635 | 22.7 | -0.300 | Monocrystalline | | 10 | [Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 630](https://comparepv.com/panel/hanwha-q-cells-america-inc-q-tron-xl-g2-3-bfg-630) | 630 | 22.6 | -0.300 | 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 Q-Cells, operating under the full name Hanwha Q CELLS, traces its roots to a German solar startup founded in 1999 that was acquired in 2012 by South Korea's Hanwha Group, one of Asia's largest industrial conglomerates. The company retains a European identity through ongoing R&D operations in Germany, while its manufacturing footprint spans South Korea, Malaysia, and the United States - including a facility in Dalton, Georgia, running at roughly 3.3 GW of annual capacity - bringing total global production to approximately 11.3 GW per year. Q-Cells has held BloombergNEF Tier 1 bankability status without interruption and is among the most widely accepted module brands for internationally financed solar projects. ZNShine (ZNSHINE PV-TECH) is a Chinese manufacturer with a considerably longer operating history, founded in 1988 in Jiangsu province. Its production bases in Changzhou, Suqian, and Dali deliver a combined annual capacity of approximately 10 GW, with further expansion planned in China and Indonesia. ZNShine has carried BNEF Tier 1 status since 2015 and recently achieved a B rating in PV Tech's bankability ranking, reflecting solid but slightly narrower institutional acceptance than Q-Cells. On balance, Q-Cells carries the stronger institutional footprint, with deeper penetration into bank-financed project markets across multiple continents. Q-Cells product families are anchored by its proprietary Q.ANTUM cell architecture, which pioneered PERC commercialization at industrial scale, and the newer Q.TRON line based on N-type TOPCon technology. The residential-oriented Q.TRON BLK M-G2+ spans 415 to 440 Wp with module efficiency reaching approximately 22.5%, while the utility-focused Q.TRON G2 Duo ML-G11+ pushes output from 575 W to 615 W, making it well suited for large ground-mount and commercial rooftop arrays. A 25-to-30-year performance warranty and an annual degradation rate of around 0.33% - below the industry average for TOPCon modules - underpin the brand's durability credentials. ZNShine's 2025 portfolio is positioned squarely toward high-wattage large-scale generation, with flagship products including 600 W N-type bifacial modules, 640 W N-type steel-frame panels designed for industrial rooftops, and a 750 W HJT bifacial series targeting utility developers who prioritize maximum energy density per module. Select ZNShine models incorporate graphene-based self-cleaning glass, a practical advantage in arid, dusty, or low-maintenance deployment environments. For a typical buyer - whether a residential installer, a commercial EPC contractor, or a utility-scale developer - Q-Cells is the more versatile and generally lower-risk default. Its coverage of both residential and utility segments, strong track record in European project finance, and partial domestic US manufacturing add up to a brand that is straightforward to specify across a wide range of project types. ZNShine is a credible and bankable alternative, most compelling when very high module wattage, HJT technology, or competitive pricing on large-volume utility procurement is the deciding factor. The two brands are not interchangeable across all contexts: Q-Cells is clearly the better fit for installers managing mixed residential and commercial portfolios, while ZNShine is best treated as a specialist utility-scale option for buyers who have done due diligence on its supply chain and warranty support in their target market. Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above. ## Other comparisons - [Q-Cells vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/q-cells-vs-a-b-energy) - [AE Solar vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-znshine) - [Q-Cells vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/q-cells-vs-aeet) - [AIKO vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/aiko-vs-znshine) - [Q-Cells vs AKCOME](https://comparepv.com/q-cells-vs-akcome) - [ARTsolar vs ZNShine](https://comparepv.com/artsolar-vs-znshine) --- Source: https://comparepv.com/q-cells-vs-znshine Not in this file, on the page: the distributions above drawn as charts.