Skip to content

How much output solar panels lose after 10, 15 and 25 years

Manufacturers warrant a straight line. Field measurements across 11,000 recorded degradation rates show a median close to that line and a mean well below it. The gap between those two numbers is where warranty claims live.

Performance9 min read

Photograph to accompany: How much output solar panels lose after 10, 15 and 25 years

The short answer

Across almost 200 published studies covering more than 11,000 measured degradation rates, crystalline silicon modules show a median decline of 0.5 to 0.6% a year and a mean of 0.8 to 0.9%. The mean is worse than the median because a minority of modules fail badly and drag it. At the median rate a panel retains about 88% of its original output after 25 years. At the mean rate it retains about 81%, which is below where a typical linear performance warranty would have put it.

Every solar quote carries a performance warranty, and it is nearly always drawn as a straight line: some percentage in year one, a fixed decline every year after, a guaranteed floor at year 25. It is a clean promise and it is easy to compare between manufacturers.

It is also a commercial undertaking rather than a measurement. What panels actually do has been measured, repeatedly, and the results are public.

What the field data says

The reference work is a compendium assembled at the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory. It aggregated more than 11,000 degradation rates from almost 200 studies across 40 countries, then re-analysed them to correct for the sampling bias that creeps in when large studies and small ones are pooled naively.

For crystalline silicon, the technology on essentially every domestic roof, it reported median degradation of 0.5 to 0.6% a year, with the mean between 0.8 and 0.9%.

So there are two honest answers to what a panel loses, and which one applies to you is not knowable in advance. The median describes the panel you probably have. The mean describes the fleet, including the ones that go wrong.

What those rates compound to

Degradation is multiplicative. Losing 0.5% of a smaller number each year is not the same as subtracting a fixed amount, and over 25 years the difference is visible.

Output retained, as a percentage of year-zero output
Annual rateAfter 10 yearsAfter 15 yearsAfter 25 years
0.5%/year (field median, best case)95.1%92.8%88.2%
0.6%/year (field median, worst case)94.2%91.4%86.0%
0.85%/year (field mean)91.8%88.0%80.8%
Typical linear warranty floor93.5%91.0%86.0%

The first three rows compound the stated rate. The fourth is arithmetic on a common warranty shape: 98% guaranteed at the end of year one, declining 0.5 percentage points a year thereafter. Warranty terms differ between manufacturers and yours must be read rather than assumed.

Field rates: Jordan, Kurtz, VanSant and Newmiller, Compendium of photovoltaic degradation rates, Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 24(7), 2016, pp. 978–989.

Read the bottom two rows against each other. A typical linear warranty floor at year 25 lands at 86.0%. The measured fleet mean lands at 80.8%. The warranty is not set generously below what panels do; it is set close to the median, which means the modules in the bad tail are precisely the ones that will breach it.

That is not an accusation. It is what a warranty is for. But it does mean the guaranteed floor should be read as the level at which you get to make a claim, rather than as a conservative estimate of performance.

The first year is different

Most warranties allow a larger drop in year one than in any year after it, commonly two or three per cent against half a per cent subsequently. That is real and it has a physical cause. Crystalline silicon modules undergo initial light-induced degradation in their first hours and weeks of exposure, and the module stabilises at a level below its factory flash test.

It also means a year-one performance check against the nameplate rating will look disappointing even on a perfectly good array, which is worth knowing before anyone panics.

What actually makes a panel degrade faster

The compendium found that hotter climates and sustained high temperatures were associated with higher degradation in some products. For a British roof that is a mild consideration rather than a dominant one. Two others matter more.

  • Thermal cycling and humidity working on the laminate, the junction box seals and the cell interconnects. This is where most long-run failures originate, and it is mechanical rather than electrical.
  • Mounting that traps heat. A roof-mounted array runs hotter than a ground-mounted one with free airflow behind it, which is already visible in the annual loss budget before any question of ageing.

Most degradation curves in the data were close to linear. The exception was the worst-performing modules, which showed non-linear wear-out, meaning they held up acceptably and then fell away. That shape is what makes a levelised cost calculation over 25 years sensitive to which tail of the distribution a product turns out to be in.

How to use this in a financial estimate

If a quote projects savings over 25 years using a flat annual generation figure, it is overstating the later years. If it applies the warranty line, it is using a commercial floor as a central estimate, which understates the median case.

The defensible approach is to model the median and state the mean as the downside, which is the same reason every figure on this site carries a lower bound alongside the expected value. What that looks like in practice, and how to check whether a quote has done it, is covered in what a 25-year warranty actually covers.

Our calculator works on current-year output rather than projecting a 25-year revenue stream, which avoids compounding an assumption about degradation on top of an assumption about tariffs. Where it does project forward, it reports the range.

Jordan, D., Kurtz, S., VanSant, K. and Newmiller, J., Compendium of photovoltaic degradation rates, Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 24(7), 2016. More than 11,000 degradation rates from almost 200 studies in 40 countries; median for crystalline silicon 0.5–0.6%/year, mean 0.8–0.9%/year. Checked 2026. Source

Common questions

How much do solar panels degrade per year?
Measured across more than 11,000 degradation rates in almost 200 published studies, crystalline silicon modules show a median decline of 0.5 to 0.6% a year and a mean of 0.8 to 0.9%. The mean is higher because a minority of modules degrade badly and pull the average up.
How much output will solar panels have lost after 25 years?
At the measured median rate of 0.5% a year, a panel retains about 88% of its original output after 25 years. At the fleet mean of roughly 0.85% a year it retains about 81%. A typical linear performance warranty floor lands near 86% at the same point.
Why is the average degradation rate worse than the typical one?
Because the distribution is not symmetric. Most modules decline slowly and predictably, while a minority fail in ways that produce much steeper losses, and those cases drag the arithmetic mean above the median without changing what a typical module does.
Do solar panels lose more output in the first year?
Yes. Crystalline silicon modules undergo light-induced degradation in their first hours and weeks of exposure and stabilise below their factory flash test rating. This is why most warranties permit a larger drop in year one, commonly two or three per cent, than in any subsequent year.
Does a 25-year performance warranty mean the panels will perform that well?
It means the manufacturer will entertain a claim below that level. The typical warranty floor sits close to the measured median rather than well below it, so the modules likely to breach it are the ones in the poorly performing tail of the distribution, which is what the warranty exists to cover.