Skip to content

Battery24%

Measured

Panel by panel

Twelve of the 24 panels have their own optimiser, so each one is measured on its own. Here they are on a photo of the frame, right now or over any period you choose.

27 September 2026

Right nowor a period:
Panel 1, monocrystalline. 193 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.69 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.3 hours.M1193 WhPanel 2, monocrystalline. 198 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.71 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.M2198 WhPanel 3, monocrystalline. 194 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.69 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.3 hours.M3194 WhPanel 4, monocrystalline. 188 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.67 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.3 hours.M4188 WhPanel 5, monocrystalline. 186 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.66 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.3 hours.M5186 WhPanel 6, monocrystalline. 187 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.67 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.3 hours.M6187 WhPanel 1, polycrystalline. 219 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.80 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P1219 WhPanel 2, polycrystalline. 216 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.79 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P2216 WhPanel 3, polycrystalline. 211 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.77 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P3211 WhPanel 4, polycrystalline. 202 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.74 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P4202 WhPanel 5, polycrystalline. 198 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.72 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P5198 WhPanel 6, polycrystalline. 201 Wh over 27 September 2026, 0.73 kWh per kWp, measured for 8.4 hours.P6201 Wh
The tilted frame seen from the lawn, photographed on 17 September 2026. Each panel carries what it produced over 27 September 2026.
Tint: energy per kilowatt peak, compared with the best of the twelve over this period.under 80 %80 to 90 %90 to 95 %95 to 99 %99 % and over

How even is each row

How much less the weakest panel of a row produces than the strongest, in percent of the strongest. This is a calculation made from the twelve measurements above, not a measurement of its own.

The six panels of a row see the same sky, so they should produce about the same share of their peak power. One that falls behind points to shade, dirt, snow or a fault. Over a period, a passing cloud no longer matters.

Upper row, monocrystalline

Strongest
M2, 706 Wh/kWp
Weakest
M5, 664 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
6 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, M5, produces 6 percent less than the strongest, M2 (664 Wh/kWp against 706 Wh/kWp). Over a period, a difference above about 5 percent deserves a look at that panel.

Lower row, polycrystalline

Strongest
P1, 797 Wh/kWp
Weakest
P5, 722 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
9 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, P5, produces 9 percent less than the strongest, P1 (722 Wh/kWp against 797 Wh/kWp). Over a period, a difference above about 5 percent deserves a look at that panel.

How to read these numbers

  • Direct current, before the inverter. The inverter loses a few percent, so the sum of these panels is more than the lab delivers. The real production is on the live page.
  • The vertical array is not shown. Its twelve modules have no optimiser, so they are only measured together, as array 3.
  • Read through Tigo. The optimisers report to the Tigo cloud and this site reads the values from there.

Each panel's history can be charted and downloaded on the data page. The three arrays are compared on key figures and records.