---
title: "Topsky Energy vs Trina Solar - Brand Comparison | ComparePV"
description: "Compare Topsky Energy vs Trina Solar solar panels: full portfolio, efficiency, cell technology breakdown, warranty terms and company background."
source: "https://comparepv.com/topsky-energy-vs-trina-solar"
---

# Topsky Energy vs Trina Solar

Trina Solar has the broader catalog (340 vs 0 models). Trina Solar leans bifacial (43% of lineup).


## The two companies


| Attribute | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Country | China | China |
| Headquarters | Shenzhen | Changzhou |
| Founded | 1998 | 1997 |
| Employees |  |  |
| Annual capacity | \<1 GW/year |  |
| Tier 1 | no | yes |
| Listed |  |  |
| Website | [https://www.topskyenergy.com](https://www.topskyenergy.com) | [https://www.trinasolar.com](https://www.trinasolar.com) |

Shenzhen Topsky Energy Co., Ltd. is a Chinese manufacturer of solar cells and photovoltaic modules, including lightweight and customized panels. The company operates production facilities in Zhejiang and Jiangsu provinces, with sales and marketing based in Shenzhen and Hong Kong. Its products are distributed to over...


## Catalog & Power


| Measure | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Panel Models | 0 | 340 | +340 |
| Max Power | 0 W | 760 W | +760 W |
| Avg Power | 0 W | 520 W | +520 W |


## Efficiency


| Measure | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Max Efficiency | - | 24.80% |  |
| Avg Efficiency | - | 21.71% |  |


## Reliability & Warranty


| Measure | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar | Margin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avg Temp Coefficient | - | -0.302%/°C |  |
| Bifacial Share | 0 (0%) | 145 (43%) | +43 pp |
| Avg Warranty | - | 28.2 yrs |  |


## Efficiency distribution

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


| Efficiency band | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar |
| --- | --- | --- |
| \<20% | 0 | 22 (6.5%) |
| 20-21% | 0 | 57 (16.8%) |
| 21-22% | 0 | 83 (24.4%) |
| 22-23% | 0 | 102 (30.0%) |
| 23%+ | 0 | 76 (22.4%) |


## Power distribution

Trina Solar offers more 600W+ panels (34% of lineup)


| Power band | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar |
| --- | --- | --- |
| \<400W | 0 | 28 (8.2%) |
| 400-499W | 0 | 142 (41.8%) |
| 500-599W | 0 | 54 (15.9%) |
| 600-699W | 0 | 72 (21.2%) |
| 700W+ | 0 | 44 (12.9%) |


## Cell technology

Dominant cell tech: **TOPCon** (73%)


| Technology | Topsky Energy | Trina Solar |
| --- | --- | --- |
| TOPCon | 0 | 248 (72.9%) |
| PERC | 0 | 75 (22.1%) |
| Unknown | 0 | 11 (3.2%) |
| N-type | 0 | 6 (1.8%) |


## Top panels, Trina Solar


| # | Model | Power | Efficiency | Temp. coefficient | Technology |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-760](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-760) | 760 | 24.5 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 2 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-755](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-755) | 755 | 24.3 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 3 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-750](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-750) | 750 | 24.1 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 4 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-745](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-745) | 745 | 24.0 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 5 | [TSM-NEG21C.20-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-co-ltd-tsm-neg21c-20-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline |
| 6 | [TSM-NEG21C.20 740](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline |
| 7 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-740) | 740 | 23.8 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |
| 8 | [TSM-NEG21C.20-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-co-ltd-tsm-neg21c-20-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline |
| 9 | [TSM-NEG21C.20 735](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.290 | Monocrystalline |
| 10 | [TSM-NEG21C.20Q-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/trina-solar-tsm-neg21c-20q-735) | 735 | 23.7 | -0.260 | Monocrystalline |


## Summary

Topsky Energy is a Chinese manufacturer headquartered in Shenzhen, Guangdong, founded in 1998. The company produces photovoltaic modules, inverters, and energy storage systems, and reports a commercial footprint spanning more than 150 countries. Despite this breadth, Topsky Energy does not appear on the BloombergNEF Tier 1 solar module bankability list as of mid-2026, which limits its standing with project finance lenders and institutional procurers. Independent verification of its annual production capacity in GW terms is not available through major industry analysts. Trina Solar, founded in Changzhou, Jiangsu in 1997, occupies a fundamentally different tier of the market. The company reports annual production capacity of approximately 100 GW and cumulative global module shipments exceeding 292 GW as of mid-2025. Trina Solar has topped BloombergNEF's bankability ranking for the eighth consecutive time with a 100% bankability score, a distinction shared by only a handful of manufacturers worldwide, and one that significantly reduces financing risk on large-scale projects.

Topsky Energy's product line spans monocrystalline PERC and HJT modules, including large-format 210 mm cell panels suited to ground-mount utility applications. Its products carry TUV Rhineland certification and CE marking, and the company also offers customized and lightweight panel formats for niche applications. Trina Solar's portfolio is anchored by the Vertex N and Vertex S+ families, both built on n-type TOPCon cells - a technology the company has been scaling commercially since 2018. Flagship modules in the Vertex N line now reach 740-760 W output with cell conversion efficiencies approaching 24.5%, and the company has held PVEL Top Performer status for eleven consecutive years. The Vertex S+ targets residential and commercial rooftop installations, while the Vertex N is optimized for utility-scale ground-mount deployments. Premium models come backed by 30-year performance warranties.

For most international buyers - residential installers, C&I project developers, or utility-scale procurers - Trina Solar is the lower-risk default. Its verified scale, consistent bankability recognition, and independently tested performance record are difficult to match. Topsky Energy may be worth considering for buyers needing unconventional module formats or more flexible sourcing arrangements, but it cannot yet offer the institutional credibility that bankability-sensitive projects demand.

Written by claude-sonnet from the figures above.


## Other comparisons

- [Topsky Energy vs A.B. Energy](https://comparepv.com/topsky-energy-vs-a-b-energy)
- [AE Solar vs Trina Solar](https://comparepv.com/ae-solar-vs-trina-solar)
- [Topsky Energy vs AEET](https://comparepv.com/topsky-energy-vs-aeet)
- [AIKO vs Trina Solar](https://comparepv.com/aiko-vs-trina-solar)
- [Topsky Energy vs AKCOME](https://comparepv.com/topsky-energy-vs-akcome)
- [ARTsolar vs Trina Solar](https://comparepv.com/artsolar-vs-trina-solar)


---

Source: https://comparepv.com/topsky-energy-vs-trina-solar