piCLASSIC™ Neo vs Single Arm YuMi®
Side-by-side comparison of piCLASSIC™ Neo (Piab) and Single Arm YuMi® (ABB) — specs, pricing, Robolist Trust Score, and verified deployments. Updated daily.
 piCLASSIC™ NeocobotPiab—Trust Score | Single Arm YuMi®cobotABB —Trust Score | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer 1: Identity & Trust | ||
| Manufacturer Country (values differ) | — | Switzerland |
| Year First Available (values differ) | 2025 | — |
| Verified Deployments | 0 Deployments | 0 Deployments |
| Layer 2: Operational | ||
| Availability Status | ACTIVE | ACTIVE |
| Layer 3: Category Specific | ||
| Arm Mechanics | ||
| Degrees of Freedom (values differ) | — | 7 |
| Repeatability (values differ) | — | ±0.03 mm |
| Max TCP Speed (values differ) | — | 1 m/s |
| Mounting Options (values differ) | inline, floor-mounted | — |
| Safety | ||
| Safety Rating (values differ) | — | ISO 10218-1, ISO/TS 15066, CE |
| Force/Torque Sensing (values differ) | — | Yes |
| Ease of Use | ||
| Setup Time (values differ) | — | 2 hrs |
| Programming Interface (values differ) | — | teach_pendant, drag_and_drop, no_code_gui |
| Commercial | ||
| Warranty (values differ) | — | 2 yrs |
| Lead Time (values differ) | — | 4 wks |
Insufficient data for full comparison
The following fields had no data for any of the selected robots: Price Range (USD), Battery / Shift Runtime, Payload, Reach, Robot Weight, IP Rating, TCP Speed (Collaborative), Power/Force Limiting, Safety I/O Pairs, Duty Cycle, Time to Redeploy, No-Code Capable, Offline Programming, Tool Flange Standard, Tool Changer Support, Integrated F/T Sensor, Wrist Power Supply, SDK Languages, ROS Compatible, Fieldbus Protocols, Digital Twin Support, MTBF, Path Accuracy, Price (USD), CaaS / Month
About this comparison
piCLASSIC™ Neo vs Single Arm YuMi® compares two robots in the cobot 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.