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

# Runergy vs AEET

Runergy has the broader catalog (124 vs 5 models). Runergy leads on peak efficiency at 24.10%. Runergy leans bifacial (77% of lineup).


## The two companies


| Attribute | Runergy | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Country | China |  |
| Headquarters | Yancheng, Jiangsu Province |  |
| Founded | 2013 |  |
| Employees | 15,000 |  |
| Annual capacity | 23GW (module capacity), 63GW (cell capacity) GW/year |  |
| Tier 1 | yes | no |
| Listed |  |  |
| Website | [http://www.runergy.com](http://www.runergy.com) |  |

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 | Runergy | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Panel Models | 124 | 5 | +119 |
| Max Power | 740 W | 200 W | +540 W |
| Avg Power | 579 W | 190 W | +389 W |


## Efficiency


| Measure | Runergy | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Max Efficiency | 24.10% | 15.70% | +8.40 pp |
| Avg Efficiency | 22.42% | 14.90% | +7.52 pp |


## Reliability & Warranty


| Measure | Runergy | AEET | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avg Temp Coefficient | -0.298%/°C | - |  |
| Bifacial Share | 95 (77%) | 0 (0%) | +77 pp |
| Avg Warranty | 29.1 yrs | 25.0 yrs | +4.1 yr |


## Efficiency distribution

Runergy skews to higher efficiency: 33% of lineup is 23%+


| Efficiency band | Runergy | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 20-21% | 9 (7.3%) | 0 |
| 21-22% | 26 (21.0%) | 0 |
| 22-23% | 48 (38.7%) | 0 |
| 23%+ | 41 (33.1%) | 0 |
| \<20% | 0 | 5 (100.0%) |


## Power distribution

Runergy offers more 600W+ panels (48% of lineup)


| Power band | Runergy | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 400-499W | 36 (29.0%) | 0 |
| 500-599W | 28 (22.6%) | 0 |
| 600-699W | 35 (28.2%) | 0 |
| 700W+ | 25 (20.2%) | 0 |
| \<400W | 0 | 5 (100.0%) |


## Cell technology

Dominant cell tech: **N-type** (60%)

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


| Technology | Runergy | AEET |
| --- | --- | --- |
| N-type | 74 (59.7%) | 0 |
| PERC | 32 (25.8%) | 5 (100.0%) |
| HJT | 18 (14.5%) | 0 |


## 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 |


## 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 and Runergy represent opposite ends of the solar manufacturing spectrum in terms of scale and institutional standing. AEET is a small manufacturer with no disclosed founding year, headquarters country, or production capacity in the public record, and it does not carry Tier 1 bankable status - meaning mainstream project lenders do not recognize it as a low-risk supplier. Runergy, by contrast, is a Chinese manufacturer founded in 2013, headquartered in Jiangsu Province, with 15,000 employees and a formidable manufacturing footprint of 23 GW of module capacity and 63 GW of cell capacity. Runergy secured BloombergNEF Tier 1 PV module status across all four quarters of 2024 - a distinction that directly affects a project's ability to attract debt financing - and earned a "Top Performer" designation from Kiwa PVEL in its 2024 reliability scorecard. On institutional credibility alone, Runergy holds a decisive advantage.

The two portfolios are equally divergent in technology. AEET's five-panel lineup tops out at 200 Wp with a peak efficiency of 15.7% and an average of 14.9%, figures consistent with older polycrystalline or early mono-PERC technology; the cell technology is unspecified, and no bifacial products are offered. A 25-year warranty is standard but unremarkable. This lineup fits narrow-market or legacy applications - perhaps small off-grid installations or budget commercial retrofits where upfront cost is the primary driver. Runergy's 98-panel catalog is a modern high-volume portfolio: average module power reaches 574 Wp and peaks at 740 Wp, average efficiency is 22.2% with a ceiling of 23.8%, and 79% of panels are bifacial. The dominant cell technology is N-type TOPCon, covering 58% of the range, and the average warranty extends to nearly 29 years. A temperature coefficient averaging -0.30% per degree Celsius is competitive for N-type silicon. This lineup is squarely aimed at utility-scale ground mounts and large commercial rooftops where energy density, bankability, and long-term degradation rates matter most.

For any buyer evaluating these two manufacturers in 2025, Runergy is the clear default choice across virtually all mainstream applications. Its Tier 1 status removes a significant financing hurdle, its N-type bifacial technology delivers meaningfully higher yields per installed square metre, and its scale provides supply-chain reliability that a five-product manufacturer simply cannot match. AEET might be worth considering only in a highly price-sensitive context where project financing is not required and where the low power output per panel is not a constraint - a narrow scenario that excludes most commercial and utility buyers.

\---LINKS---

\- https://www.runergy.com/q4-update-runergy-secures-year-round-bloombergnef-tier-1-status-as-a-pv-module-manufacturer-in-2024/ \| Runergy secures year-round BloombergNEF Tier 1 status in 2024 \| article

\- https://www.pv-tech.org/runergy-develops-26-55-efficient-m10-topcon-solar-cell/ \| Runergy develops 26.55% efficient M10 TOPCon solar cell \| article

\- https://scorecard.pvel.com/manufacturer\_name/runergy/ \| Runergy named Top Performer in Kiwa PVEL 2024 PV Module Reliability Scorecard \| review

\- https://www.renvu.com/blogs/learn/tier-1-solar-panels-list-2025-updated-manufacturers-rankings \| Tier 1 Solar Panels List 2025 - Updated Manufacturers and Rankings \| article

\- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/runergy-ranked-as-a-bloombergnef-tier-1-pv-module-manufacturer-301998949.html \| Runergy ranked as BloombergNEF Tier 1 PV Module Manufacturer \| article

Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above.


## Other comparisons

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


---

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

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