Again, both panels triggered their bypass diodes, reducing power output in the same way. No advantage for AIKO here either.
Minimal Shading (Wallet-Sized Obstruction)
This is where things got interesting. With a small object shading the panel (roughly the size of a smartphone or wallet), the AIKO panel did perform better than the Canadian panel. While the Canadian panel lost around 150 watts, the AIKO panel only lost 50 watts—a noticeable difference.
However, this advantage was only observed under very specific shading conditions and didn’t match the dramatic results shown in AIKO’s trade show demo. In reality, shading conditions vary significantly, making the real-world benefits of this technology marginal at best.
Daily Performance Comparison
Over several weeks of data collection, I found that AIKO’s panels performed about 0.9% better on average than the Canadian panels. However, after accounting for AIKO’s positive wattage tolerance (their panels tested slightly above their rated 465W output), the real performance advantage was closer to 0.2%—essentially negligible.
Interestingly, the Canadian panels performed better during early morning and late afternoon hours, when energy demand is typically higher. AIKO’s advantage appeared primarily during midday when solar generation is often at its peak and energy is either exported to the grid or clipped by the inverter. For most homeowners, better performance during peak demand hours is far more valuable than a marginal midday boost.
Marketing vs. Reality
One of my biggest frustrations with AIKO’s marketing is how misleading their demo is. It gives the false impression that AIKO’s panels are nearly immune to shading, which simply isn’t the case.
Other YouTubers and industry professionals have been misled by this demo, assuming AIKO panels make optimizers and microinverters obsolete. However, my tests prove that in real-world conditions, AIKO’s panels do not significantly outperform traditional panels under shading—except in very specific, minor shading scenarios.
This kind of marketing deception isn’t new. Companies often exaggerate their product’s capabilities to generate hype. AIKO may have developed a well-designed panel, but their exaggerated shade claims are misleading installers and consumers alike. And at the end of the day, you still have to abide by their installation manual, which clearly states you need to avoid shading
Final Verdict: Is AIKO Worth the Hype?
AIKO’s ABC cell technology does offer some performance benefits, particularly in reducing the impact of very small shadows. However, their claims about superior shade performance are vastly overstated, and their trade show demo creates unrealistic expectations.
If you’re considering AIKO panels, here are the key takeaways:
Performance: Virtually identical to other premium panels, with only a minor 0.2% efficiency advantage.
Shading Tolerance: Marginally better in specific conditions, but not a game-changer.
Long-Term Reliability: Unproven in the Australian market, raising concerns about future warranty support.
While AIKO panels are certainly not a bad choice, they aren’t the revolution they claim to be. If you’re looking for a reliable, well-supported panel, you may still be better off with established brands like Canadian Solar, Jinko, or SunPower.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments—especially if you’ve had experiences with AIKO panels in real-world installations!
As expected, when a large portion of the panel was shaded, the bypass diode engaged, reducing output for both the AIKO and Canadian panels. There was no difference in performance.
Partial Shading (One-Third of the Panel Covered)
Again, both panels triggered their bypass diodes, reducing power output in the same way. No advantage for AIKO here either.
Minimal Shading (Wallet-Sized Obstruction)
This is where things got interesting. With a small object shading the panel (roughly the size of a smartphone or wallet), the AIKO panel did perform better than the Canadian panel. While the Canadian panel lost around 150 watts, the AIKO panel only lost 50 watts—a noticeable difference.
However, this advantage was only observed under very specific shading conditions and didn’t match the dramatic results shown in AIKO’s trade show demo. In reality, shading conditions vary significantly, making the real-world benefits of this technology marginal at best.
Daily Performance Comparison
Over several weeks of data collection, I found that AIKO’s panels performed about 0.9% better on average than the Canadian panels. However, after accounting for AIKO’s positive wattage tolerance (their panels tested slightly above their rated 465W output), the real performance advantage was closer to 0.2%—essentially negligible.
Interestingly, the Canadian panels performed better during early morning and late afternoon hours, when energy demand is typically higher. AIKO’s advantage appeared primarily during midday when solar generation is often at its peak and energy is either exported to the grid or clipped by the inverter. For most homeowners, better performance during peak demand hours is far more valuable than a marginal midday boost.
Marketing vs. Reality
One of my biggest frustrations with AIKO’s marketing is how misleading their demo is. It gives the false impression that AIKO’s panels are nearly immune to shading, which simply isn’t the case.
Other YouTubers and industry professionals have been misled by this demo, assuming AIKO panels make optimizers and microinverters obsolete. However, my tests prove that in real-world conditions, AIKO’s panels do not significantly outperform traditional panels under shading—except in very specific, minor shading scenarios.
This kind of marketing deception isn’t new. Companies often exaggerate their product’s capabilities to generate hype. AIKO may have developed a well-designed panel, but their exaggerated shade claims are misleading installers and consumers alike. And at the end of the day, you still have to abide by their installation manual, which clearly states you need to avoid shading
Final Verdict: Is AIKO Worth the Hype?
AIKO’s ABC cell technology does offer some performance benefits, particularly in reducing the impact of very small shadows. However, their claims about superior shade performance are vastly overstated, and their trade show demo creates unrealistic expectations.
If you’re considering AIKO panels, here are the key takeaways:
Performance: Virtually identical to other premium panels, with only a minor 0.2% efficiency advantage.
Shading Tolerance: Marginally better in specific conditions, but not a game-changer.
Long-Term Reliability: Unproven in the Australian market, raising concerns about future warranty support.
While AIKO panels are certainly not a bad choice, they aren’t the revolution they claim to be. If you’re looking for a reliable, well-supported panel, you may still be better off with established brands like Canadian Solar, Jinko, or SunPower.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments—especially if you’ve had experiences with AIKO panels in real-world installations!
As expected, when a large portion of the panel was shaded, the bypass diode engaged, reducing output for both the AIKO and Canadian panels. There was no difference in performance.
Partial Shading (One-Third of the Panel Covered)
Again, both panels triggered their bypass diodes, reducing power output in the same way. No advantage for AIKO here either.
Minimal Shading (Wallet-Sized Obstruction)
This is where things got interesting. With a small object shading the panel (roughly the size of a smartphone or wallet), the AIKO panel did perform better than the Canadian panel. While the Canadian panel lost around 150 watts, the AIKO panel only lost 50 watts—a noticeable difference.
However, this advantage was only observed under very specific shading conditions and didn’t match the dramatic results shown in AIKO’s trade show demo. In reality, shading conditions vary significantly, making the real-world benefits of this technology marginal at best.
Daily Performance Comparison
Over several weeks of data collection, I found that AIKO’s panels performed about 0.9% better on average than the Canadian panels. However, after accounting for AIKO’s positive wattage tolerance (their panels tested slightly above their rated 465W output), the real performance advantage was closer to 0.2%—essentially negligible.
Interestingly, the Canadian panels performed better during early morning and late afternoon hours, when energy demand is typically higher. AIKO’s advantage appeared primarily during midday when solar generation is often at its peak and energy is either exported to the grid or clipped by the inverter. For most homeowners, better performance during peak demand hours is far more valuable than a marginal midday boost.
Marketing vs. Reality
One of my biggest frustrations with AIKO’s marketing is how misleading their demo is. It gives the false impression that AIKO’s panels are nearly immune to shading, which simply isn’t the case.
Other YouTubers and industry professionals have been misled by this demo, assuming AIKO panels make optimizers and microinverters obsolete. However, my tests prove that in real-world conditions, AIKO’s panels do not significantly outperform traditional panels under shading—except in very specific, minor shading scenarios.
This kind of marketing deception isn’t new. Companies often exaggerate their product’s capabilities to generate hype. AIKO may have developed a well-designed panel, but their exaggerated shade claims are misleading installers and consumers alike. And at the end of the day, you still have to abide by their installation manual, which clearly states you need to avoid shading
Final Verdict: Is AIKO Worth the Hype?
AIKO’s ABC cell technology does offer some performance benefits, particularly in reducing the impact of very small shadows. However, their claims about superior shade performance are vastly overstated, and their trade show demo creates unrealistic expectations.
If you’re considering AIKO panels, here are the key takeaways:
Performance: Virtually identical to other premium panels, with only a minor 0.2% efficiency advantage.
Shading Tolerance: Marginally better in specific conditions, but not a game-changer.
Long-Term Reliability: Unproven in the Australian market, raising concerns about future warranty support.
While AIKO panels are certainly not a bad choice, they aren’t the revolution they claim to be. If you’re looking for a reliable, well-supported panel, you may still be better off with established brands like Canadian Solar, Jinko, or SunPower.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments—especially if you’ve had experiences with AIKO panels in real-world installations!
There’s been a lot of buzz in the solar industry about AIKO, particularly due to a demo they’ve been showcasing at trade shows worldwide. The claim? Their panels perform significantly better under shading conditions compared to competitors.
If true, this could be a game-changer for solar technology, potentially making optimizers and microinverters obsolete. But does AIKO’s technology live up to the hype, or is it just another case of clever marketing? I decided to put it to the test.
A Closer Look at AIKO Solar Panels
AIKO entered the solar industry in 2009 as a manufacturer of solar cells, quickly becoming one of the largest in the world. They only started producing panels in 2018 and introduced their all-back contact (ABC) cell technology in 2022. Their panels only became available in Australia in early 2024, which raises concerns about their long-term commitment to warranties and service in the region.
On a positive note, AIKO has hired experienced professionals from the Australian solar industry, such as Thomas Bywater (formerly of Jinko) and Ross Crawford (formerly of REC). But solid leadership alone doesn’t make a solar panel worth buying. So, what sets AIKO apart?
According to their marketing, it’s the all-back contact (ABC) technology. Traditional solar cells have silver bus bars and fingers on the front, which reduce efficiency by blocking some sunlight. AIKO’s ABC cells eliminate these front-facing conductors, supposedly improving output and even enhancing performance under shading conditions.
The Trade Show Demo vs. Reality
At trade shows, AIKO has been demonstrating their panel’s supposed shade tolerance. The demo involves covering a competitor’s panel, which immediately loses power, while the AIKO panel, when shaded in the same way, continues generating electricity.
Sounds impressive, right? But as someone deeply familiar with solar technology, I was skeptical. Everything I know about how inverters, voltage, current, and maximum power point tracking (MPPT) work suggested that AIKO’s claims didn’t add up. So, I ran my own tests.
Real-World Testing: Does AIKO Perform Better in the Shade?
To get an accurate comparison, I installed a string of nine AIKO panels alongside nine Canadian Solar 465W panels on my warehouse roof in Brisbane. Both arrays were set up identically, ensuring equal shading conditions late in the afternoon. I then performed multiple tests to see how each panel responded to different levels of shading.
Moderate Shading (Significant Panel Coverage)
As expected, when a large portion of the panel was shaded, the bypass diode engaged, reducing output for both the AIKO and Canadian panels. There was no difference in performance.
Partial Shading (One-Third of the Panel Covered)
Again, both panels triggered their bypass diodes, reducing power output in the same way. No advantage for AIKO here either.
Minimal Shading (Wallet-Sized Obstruction)
This is where things got interesting. With a small object shading the panel (roughly the size of a smartphone or wallet), the AIKO panel did perform better than the Canadian panel. While the Canadian panel lost around 150 watts, the AIKO panel only lost 50 watts—a noticeable difference.
However, this advantage was only observed under very specific shading conditions and didn’t match the dramatic results shown in AIKO’s trade show demo. In reality, shading conditions vary significantly, making the real-world benefits of this technology marginal at best.
Daily Performance Comparison
Over several weeks of data collection, I found that AIKO’s panels performed about 0.9% better on average than the Canadian panels. However, after accounting for AIKO’s positive wattage tolerance (their panels tested slightly above their rated 465W output), the real performance advantage was closer to 0.2%—essentially negligible.
Interestingly, the Canadian panels performed better during early morning and late afternoon hours, when energy demand is typically higher. AIKO’s advantage appeared primarily during midday when solar generation is often at its peak and energy is either exported to the grid or clipped by the inverter. For most homeowners, better performance during peak demand hours is far more valuable than a marginal midday boost.
Marketing vs. Reality
One of my biggest frustrations with AIKO’s marketing is how misleading their demo is. It gives the false impression that AIKO’s panels are nearly immune to shading, which simply isn’t the case.
Other YouTubers and industry professionals have been misled by this demo, assuming AIKO panels make optimizers and microinverters obsolete. However, my tests prove that in real-world conditions, AIKO’s panels do not significantly outperform traditional panels under shading—except in very specific, minor shading scenarios.
This kind of marketing deception isn’t new. Companies often exaggerate their product’s capabilities to generate hype. AIKO may have developed a well-designed panel, but their exaggerated shade claims are misleading installers and consumers alike. And at the end of the day, you still have to abide by their installation manual, which clearly states you need to avoid shading
Final Verdict: Is AIKO Worth the Hype?
AIKO’s ABC cell technology does offer some performance benefits, particularly in reducing the impact of very small shadows. However, their claims about superior shade performance are vastly overstated, and their trade show demo creates unrealistic expectations.
If you’re considering AIKO panels, here are the key takeaways:
Performance: Virtually identical to other premium panels, with only a minor 0.2% efficiency advantage.
Shading Tolerance: Marginally better in specific conditions, but not a game-changer.
Long-Term Reliability: Unproven in the Australian market, raising concerns about future warranty support.
While AIKO panels are certainly not a bad choice, they aren’t the revolution they claim to be. If you’re looking for a reliable, well-supported panel, you may still be better off with established brands like Canadian Solar, Jinko, or SunPower.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments—especially if you’ve had experiences with AIKO panels in real-world installations!
