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.

12 October 2026

Right nowor a period:
Panel 1, monocrystalline. 243 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.87 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.M1243 WhPanel 2, monocrystalline. 248 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.89 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.M2248 WhPanel 3, monocrystalline. 247 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.88 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.M3247 WhPanel 4, monocrystalline. 246 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.88 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.M4246 WhPanel 5, monocrystalline. 245 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.88 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.6 hours.M5245 WhPanel 6, monocrystalline. 240 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.86 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.6 hours.M6240 WhPanel 1, polycrystalline. 252 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.92 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.P1252 WhPanel 2, polycrystalline. 252 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.92 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.6 hours.P2252 WhPanel 3, polycrystalline. 252 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.92 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.P3252 WhPanel 4, polycrystalline. 246 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.90 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.6 hours.P4246 WhPanel 5, polycrystalline. 251 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.91 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.P5251 WhPanel 6, polycrystalline. 253 Wh over 12 October 2026, 0.92 kWh per kWp, measured for 5.7 hours.P6253 Wh
The tilted frame seen from the lawn, photographed on 17 September 2026. Each panel carries what it produced over 12 October 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, 886 Wh/kWp
Weakest
M6, 856 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
3 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, M6, produces 3 percent less than the strongest, M2 (856 Wh/kWp against 886 Wh/kWp). Over a period, a difference above about 5 percent deserves a look at that panel.

Lower row, polycrystalline

Strongest
P6, 921 Wh/kWp
Weakest
P4, 896 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
3 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, P4, produces 3 percent less than the strongest, P6 (896 Wh/kWp against 921 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.