How to Compare Two Industrial Robots Side by Side: A Buyer's Checklist
Most robot shopping happens with two PDFs open in two tabs, scanning top to bottom for whatever number jumps out first. Here is the order to actually check specs in, and why, plus a worked example on two real cobots.
Most robot shopping happens with two datasheet PDFs open in two browser tabs, scanning each one top to bottom for whatever number jumps out first. That is backwards. A datasheet lists specs in the order the manufacturer’s marketing team chose, not the order that predicts whether the robot survives your application. This is the order to check them in instead, and why each one comes where it does. If a term below is unfamiliar, our datasheet glossary defines all ten in one place; this piece is about the sequence and the decision each comparison actually makes.
1. Payload at your reach, not the headline payload
Start here, before anything else, because it is the fastest way to eliminate a robot that looks fine on paper and isn’t. Rated payload is usually measured at a specific, favorable point in the work envelope, not at the distance your application actually needs. What your robot’s payload rating doesn’t tell you and payload vs reach: 258 robots, one efficient frontier both show how sharply effective capacity can fall as reach increases, and that the drop-off is model-specific, so two robots with an identical headline payload can diverge once you plot the real distance. If both candidates clear your actual reach requirement with margin, move on. If either is marginal, stop and resolve it here rather than carrying a maybe into every comparison that follows.
2. Duty cycle and environment fit
Next, check whether either robot is even rated for the environment it will sit in. A robot that wins every spec comparison in a clean office demo is the wrong robot if your line runs a daily washdown and it isn’t sealed for one. Robot IP ratings: only 21% survive a washdown breaks down what IP65 and above actually buys you against dust and water, and our temperature range piece covers the other environmental filter buyers skip: cold-storage and outdoor-adjacent cells can rule out a robot before payload or price ever enters the conversation. Treat this step as a pass/fail filter, not a scored comparison — an IP rating higher than your cell needs is wasted spec, not a tiebreaker win.
3. Safety architecture
With two robots that both fit the physical and environmental job, compare what their safety certifications actually cover. PLd, PLe and SIL 2 by robot brand is the one to read before this step, because a Performance Level or SIL rating certifies a specific function, such as speed and separation monitoring, not the robot as a whole. Two “collaborative” robots can carry different certified functions, and that difference changes how much fencing, muting, or speed limiting your integrator has to design around it. This is also where a cobot-vs-industrial-arm comparison usually gets decided in practice: not by payload, but by what safety architecture is already built in versus what has to be added at the cell level.
4. Controller and programming ecosystem
Last, and the step buyers most often skip, is what happens after the purchase order. Robot controller platforms by brand and which industrial robots are actually easiest to program cover the two questions that matter here: does this brand’s controller and teach method match what your floor already knows, and how much retraining does switching cost? This is the spec that never shows up on a datasheet at all, and it is usually the one that makes switching brands more expensive than the price difference between two robots would suggest. Check it last because it only matters once you already know both candidates are physically, environmentally, and safety-suitable — ecosystem lock-in is a tiebreaker between two viable robots, not a filter on its own.
Worked example: two real cobots, in order
Run the order above on two robots actually in our catalog: the Universal Robots UR10e and the FANUC CRX-10iA, a common real-world matchup since both get specified into similar collaborative pick-and-place and machine-tending cells.
Open the side-by-side compare page for these two and work it in the same four steps rather than scanning the table top to bottom:
- Payload at reach. Check the payload and reach rows together, not separately — the compare tool bars both so you can see which one actually has more usable capacity at the distance your part needs, not just which has the bigger headline number.
- Environment. Check the IP rating row. If your cell involves any washdown or heavy dust, this is a pass/fail check before either robot’s other specs matter.
- Safety. Check the safety ratings row for what function each certification actually covers, using the glossary above if the notation is unfamiliar.
- Ecosystem. The compare table won’t settle this one — that’s a controller-platform and training-cost question, not a spec row, which is exactly why it’s step 4 and not step 1.
The live table reflects our current catalog data, so we’re not restating numbers here that could drift out of date against the page itself. Swap in your own two candidates on the compare tool and run the same four steps; the order is what does the work, not which two robots you start with.
Frequently asked questions
What's the first spec I should compare between two robots, not the last? +
Payload at your actual reach distance, not the headline payload number. Two robots can carry the same rated payload at their default reference point and diverge sharply once you extend the load toward full reach, because the drop-off curve differs by model. Check that pairing before anything else, since it determines whether either robot is even a viable candidate.
Do I need to compare safety ratings if neither robot will run without guarding? +
Yes, because the safety rating tells you what a specific function is certified to do, such as speed and separation monitoring or an emergency stop circuit, and that shapes how much guarding you actually need to design and buy. A robot with a lower Performance Level on the function you care about can mean more fencing, more sensors, or a slower collaborative speed limit to hit the same real-world risk reduction.
Is it fair to compare a UR cobot and a FANUC cobot on the same checklist? +
Yes, and it's one of the more common real comparisons buyers make, since both are sold into similar collaborative applications. The specs that usually decide it aren't payload or reach, which tend to be close, but programming ecosystem and controller lock-in, since switching a cell's brand later means re-teaching, recertifying, and often re-integrating peripherals.
Compare these robots