Cyborg Index · July 2026

1X NEO vs Kepler Forerunner K2

Both humanoids read on the same 8 axes and 40 sub-axes, using the published Index scores. Every difference below carries the public evidence behind it, and sub-axes with no public evidence count as 0 rather than being skipped.

Overall standing

Capability score · 0–5 over 40 sub-axes

1X NEO

1.27of 5

Rank

Coverage

28/40

Proof

0.07

Kepler Forerunner K2

Kepler Robotics

1.32of 5

Rank

Coverage

26/40

Proof

0.06

The short answer

Kepler Forerunner K2 scores 0.05 higher than 1X NEO, but that lead rests mostly on vendor claims and demos.

Only 5% of Kepler Forerunner K2's score is carried by independently verified material — the rest is claimed or shown in demos. 1X NEO has more unscored ground than the gap between them, so this could change next month.

Where 1X NEO is ahead

Learning+1.00Rests on claims and demos
Safety+0.40Rests on claims and demos
Perception+0.20Rests on claims and demos

Where Kepler Forerunner K2 is ahead

Manipulation+1.00Rests on claims and demos
Locomotion+0.80Rests on claims and demos
Autonomy+0.20Rests on claims and demos

What would change it

4 sub-axes on the trailing side have no public evidence yet. If all of them scored full marks they would be worth 0.50 — against a gap of 0.05.

Manipulation · Bimanualup to +0.125
Locomotion · Uneven terrainup to +0.125
Locomotion · Disturbance recoveryup to +0.125
Deployment · Field hoursup to +0.125

There is more unscored ground than there is gap, so this result could turn over after the next research month.

How much we know

68%of sub-axes covered

We have public evidence for 68% of the 40 sub-axes across these two.

1X NEO · 70%

Kepler Forerunner K2 · 65%

The shape of each score

1X NEO1.27

28/40 sub-axes have evidence

Faint outline = Kepler Forerunner K2

Kepler Forerunner K21.32

26/40 sub-axes have evidence

Faint outline = 1X NEO

Reading the wheels — clockwise from the top

1 Locomotion
2 Manipulation
3 Perception
4 Autonomy
5 Learning
6 HRI
7 Deployment
8 Safety

Each wheel has 40 spokes — five per axis. A longer spoke is a higher score, and the dashed rings mark 1 to 4. Hover or tab onto any spoke to read the axis, the sub-axis and the exact value. A missing spoke means there is no public evidence for that sub-axis yet, which is not the same as scoring zero. The faint outline on each wheel is the other humanoid, drawn on the same scale.

Every axis, every sub-axis

Manipulation1.00 Learning1.00 Locomotion0.80 Safety0.40 Perception0.20 Autonomy0.20 HRIlevel Deploymentlevel

1X NEOKepler Forerunner K2

Shared 0–5 track · widest gap first

Manipulation

0.80 / 1.80► 1.00

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 2/5 vs 3/5

Grasp variety

2.00 / 3.00► 1.00

Bimanual

— / 4.00► 4.00

Force control

2.00 / 2.00

In hand reorient

— / —

Tool use

— / —

Learning

2.00 / 1.00◄ 1.00

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 5/5 vs 2/5

Imitation learning

2.00 / 2.00

Sim to real

2.00 / —◄ 2.00

Foundation policy

2.00 / 3.00► 1.00

Data flywheel

2.00 / —◄ 2.00

Transfer fine tune

2.00 / —◄ 2.00

Locomotion

1.20 / 2.00► 0.80

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 3/5 vs 4/5

Flat ground walking

2.00 / 2.00

Uneven terrain

— / 3.00► 3.00

Stairs

2.00 / —◄ 2.00

Disturbance recovery

— / 3.00► 3.00

Speed endurance

2.00 / 2.00

Safety

0.60 / 0.20◄ 0.40

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 2/5 vs 1/5

Functional safety

2.00 / 1.00◄ 1.00

Certifications

— / —

E stop arch

— / —

Incident transparency

— / —

Force impact limits

1.00 / —◄ 1.00

Perception

1.60 / 1.40◄ 0.20

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 4/5 vs 4/5

Sensor stack

2.00 / 2.00

Scene understanding

2.00 / 1.00◄ 1.00

Spatial memory

2.00 / 2.00

Object permanence

— / —

Semantic world model

2.00 / 2.00

Autonomy

1.00 / 1.20► 0.20

Rests on claims and demosEvidenced cells · 4/5 vs 4/5

Unattended operation

0.00 / 0.00

Task horizon

1.00 / 3.00► 2.00

Generalization

2.00 / 1.00◄ 1.00

Instruction following

2.00 / 2.00

Recovery from failure

— / —

HRI

1.80 / 1.80

Not enough public record yetEvidenced cells · 4/5 vs 4/5

Speech io

2.00 / 2.00

Nl instruction

2.00 / 3.00► 1.00

Intent recognition

— / —

Safe proximity

3.00 / 2.00◄ 1.00

Social presentation

2.00 / 2.00

Deployment

1.20 / 1.20

Not enough public record yetEvidenced cells · 4/5 vs 4/5

Named pilots

1.00 / 1.00

Field hours

— / 1.00► 1.00

Customer diversity

1.00 / 3.00► 2.00

Supportability

2.00 / —◄ 2.00

Commercial posture

2.00 / 1.00◄ 1.00

Segment length and thickness are the gapNo public evidence yet

Which is better for what

Each row is decided by the axes that matter for that kind of work, read off the same Capability scores as the ranking. Rows only appear where both humanoids have enough public record to answer.

Manufacturing and warehouse work

Named pilots and field hours, backed by what the hands can actually do.

Kepler Forerunner K2

Kepler Forerunner K2 scores higher on Deployment and Manipulation — 1.40 against 1.07 for 1X NEO.

Running without a human in the loop

Unattended operation and task horizon, backed by what the robot can perceive.

Level

1X NEO and Kepler Forerunner K2 read the same on Autonomy and Perception (1.20 vs 1.27).

Moving through difficult ground

Uneven terrain, stairs and disturbance recovery.

Kepler Forerunner K2

Kepler Forerunner K2 scores higher on Locomotion — 2.00 against 1.20 for 1X NEO.

Working alongside people

Functional safety and certification, plus how it reads and answers people.

1X NEO

1X NEO scores higher on Safety and HRI — 1.00 against 0.73 for Kepler Forerunner K2.

Picking up new tasks

Imitation learning, transfer and generalisation across tasks.

1X NEO

1X NEO scores higher on Learning and Autonomy — 1.67 against 1.07 for Kepler Forerunner K2.

Research and developer use

How much of the stack is documented and reproducible.

1X NEO

1X NEO scores higher on Learning and Perception — 1.87 against 1.13 for Kepler Forerunner K2.

How solid the record is on each side

1X NEO

Sub-axes on the record: 28 of 40 · 70%
Carried by verified material: 5%
Rests on claims and demos: 1.20

Best documented — Locomotion, Perception, Autonomy, Learning, HRI, Deployment

Nothing on the record — every axis has at least one read

Kepler Forerunner K2

Sub-axes on the record: 26 of 40 · 65%
Carried by verified material: 5%
Rests on claims and demos: 1.26

Best documented — Locomotion, Manipulation, Perception, Autonomy, HRI, Deployment

Nothing on the record — every axis has at least one read

What this comparison cannot settle

Neither humanoid has a public read on 8 of the 40 sub-axes, so those cannot be compared at all.
10 sub-axes are read on only one side. A one-sided cell is undecided, not a zero for the silent side.
Most of 1X NEO's score rests on vendor statements and demo footage rather than independently verified material (5% carried by verified evidence).
Most of Kepler Forerunner K2's score rests on vendor statements and demo footage rather than independently verified material (5% carried by verified evidence).
Demonstrations happen in different environments and product revisions are not always equivalent, so like-for-like uptime and throughput figures do not exist for most of the field.

Go deeper on either humanoid

Nearby comparisons

All comparisons →