Sharp vs Trina Solar - solar panel manufacturer comparison
Trina Solar has the broader catalog (340 vs 19 models). Trina Solar leads on peak efficiency at 24.80%.
Both catalogues are read from the manufacturers' own datasheets. A brand is not scored against the market here, only against the other brand on this page.
The two companies
Sharp Corporation is a Japanese electronics company founded in 1912. It operates globally, offering a wide range of products including consumer electronics, home appliances, energy solutions, and business solutions. Since 2016, it has been majority-owned by Foxconn.
- Founded
- 1912
- Headquarters
- Sakai, Osaka Prefecture, Japan
- Annual capacity
- 15.4 GW/year
- Employees
- 40,123
- Listed
- TYO: 6753
- Tier 1 bankable
- Yes
- Founded
- 1997
- Headquarters
- Changzhou, China
- Tier 1 bankable
- Yes
Catalogue against catalogue
An average over a catalogue describes the range a manufacturer publishes, not the module you would buy. A brand with two flagship panels and eighty older ones averages worse than one that has retired its back catalogue.
What each of them builds
Sharp skews to higher efficiency: 32% of lineup is 23%+
Sharp offers more 600W+ panels (37% of lineup)
Dominant cell tech: HJT (37%)
Dominant cell tech: TOPCon (73%)
The flagships
Written summary
Sharp is a Japanese electronics and energy company headquartered in Osaka, founded in 1912 by Tokuji Hayakawa. Its solar division traces back to 1959, making Sharp one of the earliest pioneers of photovoltaic research globally. The company holds Tier 1 bankable manufacturer status, though its annual production scale is considerably more modest compared to the leading Chinese volume producers. Trina Solar, founded in 1997 and headquartered in Changzhou, Jiangsu, China, has maintained a consistent presence on the BloombergNEF Tier 1 PV module manufacturer list, most recently confirmed in Q1 2025, and has accumulated over 205 GW in global cumulative shipments. In terms of institutional footprint and manufacturing scale, Trina Solar carries considerably more weight in international project finance circles.
Sharp's product portfolio addresses residential rooftop and commercial or C&I applications, with confirmed cell technologies spanning PERC, HJT, and TOPCon. The brand's appeal rests on its long track record and Japanese engineering heritage, which resonates with buyers who place a premium on brand provenance. Trina Solar's offering is organized around the Vertex platform, built on N-type TOPCon cell technology. The Vertex S+ targets residential and small commercial rooftops, while the large-format Vertex N series - including bifacial dual-glass modules reaching up to 760 W with 24.5 percent efficiency according to pv-magazine - serves utility-scale ground-mount and large C&I projects. Trina also offers hail-resistant variants for markets prone to severe weather, broadening its applicability across geographies.
For most international buyers, Trina Solar is the more practical default. Its consistent BNEF recognition, mature N-type TOPCon product line verified by independent lab testing including PVEL, and multi-segment portfolio make it easier to specify across project types and scales. Sharp is a credible and bankable choice, particularly for buyers who value its pioneering history, but the two brands are not fully interchangeable when utility-scale volume or cutting-edge module power classes are required.
Generated by Claude Sonnet · 2026-06-11
Other brand comparisons
Shop prices: See 6 Sharp offers · See 175 Trina Solar offers
Comparisons are computed from manufacturer datasheets held in the ComparePV database and may not reflect a brand's complete current lineup. Nothing on this page is paid placement.