EffiBOT vs VNQ 50
Side-by-side comparison of EffiBOT (Effidence) and VNQ 50 (VisionNav) — specs, pricing, Robo Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
Optimize comparison for buyer
Optimized for Cleaning & Facilities buyers. Priority specs lifted to the top and marked with a target.
Layer 1: Identity & Trust
Manufacturer Country
- EffiBOTFrance
- VNQ 50China
Year First Available
- EffiBOT2015
- VNQ 50—
Verified Deployments
- EffiBOT0 Deployments
- VNQ 500 Deployments
Layer 2: Operational
Battery / Shift Runtime
- EffiBOT8 hrs
- VNQ 50—
Availability Status
- EffiBOTACTIVE
- VNQ 50ACTIVE
Payload & Form Factor
Payload
- EffiBOT500 kg
- VNQ 505,000 kg
AMR Subtype
- EffiBOTunit load carrier
- VNQ 50tugger
Length
- EffiBOT1,450 mm
- VNQ 50—
Width
- EffiBOT660 mm
- VNQ 50—
Turning Radius
- EffiBOT1,200 mm
- VNQ 501,300 mm
Min Aisle Width
- EffiBOT3,300 mm
- VNQ 501,700 mm
Robot Weight
- EffiBOT140 kg
- VNQ 50—
Navigation & Sensing
Navigation Type
- EffiBOTslam natural
- VNQ 50lidar slam
Pedestrian Detection
- EffiBOTYes
- VNQ 50—
Battery
Battery Chemistry
- EffiBOTli ion
- VNQ 50—
Battery Capacity
- EffiBOT1.6 kWh
- VNQ 50—
Charging Time
- EffiBOT3.5 hrs
- VNQ 50—
Safety
Safety LiDAR Coverage
- EffiBOT360 °
- VNQ 50—
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | France | China |
| Year First Available (values differ) | 2015 | — |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Battery / Shift Runtime (priority for Cleaning & Facilities buyers) (values differ) | 8 hrs | — |
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Payload & Form Factor | ||
| Payload (priority for Cleaning & Facilities buyers) (values differ) | 500 kg | 5,000 kg |
| AMR Subtype (values differ) | unit load carrier | tugger |
| Length (values differ) | 1,450 mm | — |
| Width (values differ) | 660 mm | — |
| Turning Radius (values differ) | 1,200 mm | 1,300 mm |
| Min Aisle Width (values differ) | 3,300 mm | 1,700 mm |
| Robot Weight (values differ) | 140 kg | — |
| Navigation & Sensing | ||
| Navigation Type (values differ) | slam natural | lidar slam |
| Pedestrian Detection (values differ) | Yes | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery Chemistry (values differ) | li ion | — |
| Battery Capacity (values differ) | 1.6 kWh | — |
| Charging Time (values differ) | 3.5 hrs | — |
| Safety | ||
| Safety LiDAR Coverage (values differ) | 360 ° | — |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Price, Ground Clearance, Localization Accuracy, Docking Repeatability, Obstacle Detection Range, Min Object Detection Height, Max Speed (Loaded), Max Speed (Unloaded), Picks / Hour / Robot, Runtime (Loaded), Opportunity Charging, Auto Docking, Battery Swap, Charge Cycles (Rated), ISO 3691-4 Certified, R15.08 Certified, Safety Category, Emergency Stops, Safety Zone Count, Audible Alert, WMS Integrations, API Type, Fleet Size Supported, Multi-Robot Traffic Mgmt, OTA Updates, Cybersecurity Certs, MTBF, Uptime SLA, Predictive Maintenance, Field Service Response, Spare Parts Lead Time, Price (USD), RaaS / Month, Pricing Models, Warranty, Expected Service Life
ROI Comparison
Same operating assumptions across every robot — the only difference is price. Set your numbers once to see which pays back fastest.
Annual labor displaced (per robot): $50,000
| Metric | EffiBOT | VNQ 50 |
|---|---|---|
| Investment | No price | No price |
| Payback period | — | — |
| Net savings (5 yr) | — | — |
| ROI (5 yr) | — | — |
EffiBOT, VNQ 50 have no listed price, so payback can't be computed. Contact the manufacturer for a quote.
Estimates labor-cost displacement only — not a full total cost of ownership. Actual ROI depends on integration, maintenance, training, downtime, and task fit. Converted currencies are indicative; USD is the price of record.
Trade-offs at a glance
Frequently asked
Who makes EffiBOT and VNQ 50?
EffiBOT is made by Effidence, based in FR. VNQ 50 is made by VisionNav, based in CN.
How do EffiBOT and VNQ 50 compare on the Robo Score?
EffiBOT scores 72.0 on the Robo Score. VNQ 50 scores 52.3. The Robo Score is a 0–100 credibility figure blending commercial maturity, verified deployments, company standing, and independent coverage — see methodology for the full breakdown.
Are EffiBOT and VNQ 50 in the same category?
Both robots are classified as Amr Warehouse on Robolist. Filters and ranking treat them as direct alternatives.
What is the realistic total cost of ownership for Amr Warehouse robots?
Hardware cost is one input. Amr Warehouse TCO also includes integration, training, downtime, and end-of-life. Our breakdown: AMR TCO: Fleet Size, Charging Infrastructure, and WMS Integration.
What should a buyer ask vendors when choosing between EffiBOT and VNQ 50?
Spec sheets only show part of the story. Useful vendor questions cover support, lifecycle, integration cost, and references. We have a buyer-focused checklist: AMR Vendor Selection: Orchestration, Integration, and Scaling.
Going deeper — picking the right robot
AMR TCO: Fleet Size, Charging Infrastructure, and WMS Integration
8 min readWarehouse AMRs
AMR Vendor Selection: Orchestration, Integration, and Scaling
9 min readWarehouse AMRs
AMR Pilot in an Existing Warehouse: The 90-Day Playbook
9 min readWarehouse AMRs
Build vs buy vs lease: which model fits a first deployment
8 min readChoosing Your First Robot
The hidden specs vendors hope you'll miss
10 min readReading the Spec Sheet
Want to be notified when specs or pricing change for these robots? Drop your email.
Other comparisons
About this comparison
EffiBOT vs VNQ 50 compares two robots in the amr-warehouse category. All data is sourced from manufacturer spec sheets, verified deployments, and third-party filings; see our methodology for how the Robo Score is calculated.