Erica vs Figure 02
Side-by-side comparison of Erica (Ishiguro Lab, Kyoto University, and ATR) and Figure 02 (Figure AI) — specs, pricing, Robolist Trust Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
 EricahumanoidIshiguro Lab, Kyoto University, and ATR6.7Trust Score |  Figure 02humanoidFigure AI28.3Trust Score | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | — | US |
| Year First Available (values differ) | 2015 | 2024 |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Price Range (USD) (values differ) | — | US$26,970 |
| Battery / Shift Runtime (values differ) | — | 5 hrs |
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Physical Form Factor | ||
| Height (values differ) | 1660 mm | 167.64 mm |
| Weight (values differ) | — | 70 kg |
| Mobility Type (values differ) | static | bipedal |
| Humanoid Subtype (values differ) | android | full bipedal |
| Walking Speed (values differ) | — | 1.2 m/s |
| Terrain (values differ) | indoor | flat_indoor, mild_incline |
| Payload & Dexterity | ||
| Payload (values differ) | — | 20 kg |
| Payload (Peak) (values differ) | — | 25 kg |
| Total DOF (values differ) | 44 | 40 |
| Arm DOF (values differ) | 9 | — |
| Hand DOF (values differ) | 3 | 16 |
| Bimanual Coordination (values differ) | — | independent |
| Tool Use (values differ) | — | vendor demo |
| Compute & AI | ||
| Onboard Compute (values differ) | Sensor network connected to multiple PCs. One PC to control actuators. | High-performance onboard computer (Details Awaiting Confirmation) |
| Compute Platform (values differ) | — | Tesla custom |
| VLM Capable (values differ) | — | onboard large |
| Foundation Models (values differ) | — | Helix |
| Imitation Learning (values differ) | — | single task |
| Teleoperation (values differ) | — | teleoperation |
| Programming (values differ) | code_ros, code_python, java | code_python, code_ros, teleoperation |
| Battery & Power | ||
| Runtime (values differ) | — | 8 hrs |
| Battery Capacity (values differ) | — | 2.3 kWh |
| Battery Swap (values differ) | — | No |
| Safety | ||
| Force-Limited Arms (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Human Detection Method (values differ) | — | vision human |
| Safe Speed Near Humans (values differ) | — | software_defined |
| Software | ||
| SDK Languages (values differ) | code_ros, code_python, java | Python, C++ |
| ROS Support (values differ) | Yes | none |
| Simulation Platforms (values differ) | — | NVIDIA Omniverse |
| Open API (values differ) | — | limited rest |
| Air-Gap Capable (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Reliability | ||
| Deployment Maturity (values differ) | prototype | production pilot |
| Commercial | ||
| Price (USD) (values differ) | — | $26,970 |
| Price Tier (values differ) | — | 80-150K |
| Pricing Model (values differ) | — | capex |
| Production Pilots (values differ) | — | BMW Spartanburg |
| Applications (values differ) | research | warehouse_transport, manufacturing, hazardous_env |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Running Capable, Stair Climbing, Arm Reach, Grip Strength, Manipulation Repeatability, Charging Time, Charging Method, Avg Power Consumption, Fall Recovery, Fall Detection Response, Emergency Stops, MTBF, Task Success Rate, IP Rating, Noise Level, RaaS / Month, Developer Unit Price, Delivery Lead Time, Warranty
About this comparison
Erica vs Figure 02 compares two robots in the humanoid category. All data is sourced from manufacturer spec sheets, verified deployments, and third-party filings; see our methodology for how the Robolist Trust Score is calculated.