Apptronik Apollo vs XPeng IRON
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.
The public record is still thin on at least one side of this pair, so treat the ordering as provisional rather than settled.
Overall standing
Capability score · 0–5 over 40 sub-axesApptronik Apollo scores 0.45 higher than XPeng IRON, but that lead rests mostly on vendor claims and demos.
Only 9% of Apptronik Apollo's score is carried by independently verified material — the rest is claimed or shown in demos. XPeng IRON has more unscored ground than the gap between them, so this could change next month.
- Manipulation+1.40Rests on claims and demos
- Autonomy+0.60Rests on claims and demos
- HRI+0.60Rests on claims and demos
- Locomotion+0.40Rests on claims and demos
- Perception+0.40Rests on claims and demos
8 sub-axes on the trailing side have no public evidence yet. If all of them scored full marks they would be worth 1.00 — against a gap of 0.45.
- Learning · Imitation learningup to +0.125
- Locomotion · Speed enduranceup to +0.125
- Autonomy · Unattended operationup to +0.125
- Manipulation · Force controlup to +0.125
- HRI · Safe proximityup to +0.125
We have public evidence for 35% of the 40 sub-axes across these two. Treat this as an early read.
17/40 sub-axes have evidence
Faint outline = XPeng IRON
11/40 sub-axes have evidence
Faint outline = Apptronik Apollo
- 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.
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.
- Sub-axes on the record
- 17 of 40 · 43%
- Carried by verified material
- 9%
- Rests on claims and demos
- 0.85
- Sub-axes on the record
- 11 of 40 · 28%
- Carried by verified material
- 2%
- Rests on claims and demos
- 0.46
What this comparison cannot settle
- Neither humanoid has a public read on 21 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.
- Public evidence covers 35% of the sub-axes across the two. Treat the overall ordering as an early read.
- Most of Apptronik Apollo's score rests on vendor statements and demo footage rather than independently verified material (9% carried by verified evidence).
- Most of XPeng IRON's score rests on vendor statements and demo footage rather than independently verified material (2% 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.