EU Mobile Phone Energy Efficiency Analysis
Introduction
On 20th June 2025, new EU battery Regulation (EU) 2023/1669 for mobile phone batteries came into force which all manufacturers must comply with. A database of all the information is publicly available and can be queried manually or via an API.
Here, an analysis is shown on all data available from the API as of 2025-11-09. It will be updated periodically.
The main focus of the analysis is to understand the relationship between battery size and battery endurance as a function of the standard EU Energy Efficiency class range A-G used for assessing anything from TVs to houses.
Total number of phones in database: 760
Overall Trends
Over 70% of all smartphones are class A or B meaning that already most manufacturers are meeting the needs of the new EU regulations.
There are three main battery metrics reported: Battery Endurance in Cycles, Measured Battery Capacity, and Battery Endurance per Cycle.
Battery Endurance in Cycles
Here the test measures the number of battery charge cycles until the maximum capacity drops below 80% the rated capacity. The minimum number of cycles required to meet the standard is 800 and the vast majority are rated as 1000 cycles or more. Notably 13 models are rated below 800 cycles.
Rated Battery Capacity
The next two plots show the spread of the battery capacities of all phones broken down by energy class. There appears to be a trend where better efficiencies classes (A or B) have smaller batteries.
Note: these are measured battery capacities and often differ from what the manufacturer reports.
How does battery capacity or energy class relate to actual use? The phones were put through standard testing procedures under controlled conditions in what should result in objectively comparative results. Which won’t be the case for many of the online tests that have been done over the years by popular websites or youtube channels.
Battery Endurance per Cycle
Rather than look at the lifetime endurance of battery this metric measures the lifetime of a battery given a standardised usage pattern.
The picture over the next two plots isn’t very clear and shows a lot of variability especially with classes D-G. In classes A-C the trend seems to be that the minimum endurance decreases with class, so class A phones have the best minimum battery life.
If we look at the averages (medians) within each class the difference between A-C and D-G is more stark. The average battery sizes are almost identical in A-C, but the endurance drops by class with A being the longest lasting and C the shortest.
D-G phones have larger battery capacity, on average, yet the endurance doesn’t correlate nor trend with class. The small number of models (F & G in particular) make it difficult to draw any conclusions.
| Class | n | Endurance (median, minutes) | Battery Capacity (median, mAh) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 247 | 3800.0 | 5100 |
| B | 304 | 3064.0 | 5150 |
| C | 119 | 2644.0 | 5150 |
| D | 38 | 2683.0 | 6215 |
| E | 32 | 2502.5 | 5825 |
| F | 14 | 3880.0 | 13000 |
| G | 6 | 3458.0 | 7500 |
A final comment regarding the endurance test: the times seem astonishingly long. 3,780 minutes is over two and half days of life which doesn’t seem to reflect typical use cases.
Breakdowns by Brands
Across all the data there are 102 manufacturers where most have between 1-3 models on the EU market and several have over 20.
There are too many manufacturers (n = 102) so selecting some well-known brands to look at in more detail instead: Apple, ASUS, Fairphone, Google, Motorola, Nothing, OnePlus, OPPO, Samsung, Vivo.
Of the common or well-known brands Motorola has the most with 30 and then Samsung with 18. Note that the database includes models that may no longer be available to buy from the manufacturer e.g. Apple’s 11 models don’t tally with the five currently for sale.
All manufacturers, except ASUS, have models rated in two or more classes. Samsung and Fairphone have models rated A-C whereas Nothing has models classed as A or C, but not B.
Comparison of Battery Size vs Endurance per Cycle
As was touched upon above there seems to be a relationship between battery size and endurance. Not really a surprise and the plot shows for each class a positive correlation where smaller batteries have shorter endurance and larger batteries have longer endurance from bottom-left to top-right.
The trend appears consistent between classes, but if we plot classes A-C together - D-G are too few to be meaningful - and add a trendline we can see a few features. The nearer the trendline is to the bottom-right the more efficient that class is, which means that A (green) is the most and C (purple) is the least efficient. A & C trendlines are almost parallel which means that efficiency scales consistent regardless of battery capacity. Class B (orange) phones show a markedly reduced efficiency as battery size increases.
Battery Efficiency
Using the above data, the definition of battery efficiency can be formalised as the number minutes of battery life per 1,000 mAh or per 1 Ah.
Here, we can see that there is a clear trend; better class results in better efficiency. Classes F & G are more variable due to low numbers of models.
According to the data there is a model with over 4,700 minutes per Ah of battery capacity the “HAMMER ENERGY X”, however, it has a rated battery capacity of only 500 mAh. The manufacturer’s website reports it as having a 5,000 mAh battery, which seems a more accurate figure.
We can now add another column to the average battery values table showing the difference in median battery efficiency between classes. The typical loss in battery efficiency is 12-16% when dropping down a class across classesA-E or over an hour per 1,000 mAh. For example, A Class B phone will be 1 hr 42 min per 1,000 mAh less efficient tha a Class A one.
| Class | n | Endurance (median, minutes) | Capacity (median, mAh) | Efficiency (median, min/Ah) | Difference (min/Ah) | Difference (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 247 | 3800.0 | 5100 | 685 | NA | NA |
| B | 304 | 3064.0 | 5150 | 583 | -102 | -14.9 |
| C | 119 | 2644.0 | 5150 | 508 | -75 | -12.9 |
| D | 38 | 2683.0 | 6215 | 428 | -80 | -15.7 |
| E | 32 | 2502.5 | 5825 | 359 | -69 | -16.1 |
| F | 14 | 3880.0 | 13000 | 445 | 86 | 24.0 |
| G | 6 | 3458.0 | 7500 | 479 | 34 | 7.6 |
5000 mAh Battery Capacity
There is a large number of phones with 5000 +/- 200 mAh. Seems to be a popular specification so let’s delve a bit deeper.
Total number of phones = 259 (34% of all phones)
Difference in endurance between best and worst = 52.2 hours
The best model is the CORE-M6 by CROSSCALL.
The worst model is the DISCOVERY 3 SE - 2526 by SPC.
Within the 5000 mAh phones nearly 80% are class A or B and ~7% are class D-G. In contrast to the all model analysis above, there is a very clear relationship between class and endurance per cycle. Class A phones have the longest endurance and D-G the shortest.
Samsung is the largest manufacturer of mobile phones in the world so how do they rate on average vs the rest of the market within this popular segment of 5,000 mAh phones. 8 out their 18 phones sit in this group.
Below, in red are all phones excluding Samsung and in green are the Samsung phones. Across the board their within-class performance is poor compared to the other manufacturers where the green boxes are much lower than red ones.
Compared to Motorola - the well-known manufacturer with the most models - with 18 out of their 30 models in the 5,000 mAh class. The green boxes representing the Motorola models line up with the red ones meaning they are more comparable to the other models.
Note: Motorola supplies very different models in the EU/Europe compared to the US (and other countries?) meaning that this result may not translate across the pond.
Note: an Apple comparison would have been useful here, but Apple only have one model in the 5,000 mAh class (iPhone 17 Pro Max).
Apple Progress
In was notable when the EU ratings first came out the current iPhone models were all rated as Class B. With the release of the iPhone 17 series and iPhone Air all the new models are rated Class A. So what changed?
With the recent release of a new series of iPhones there is now three generations’ worth of data available to start looking at trends for the standard models: Base, Plus, Pro and Pro Max.
Firstly, in terms of endurance per cycle there is a linear uptick for the base model, Plus and Pro Max models. The iPhone Pro model, however, shows a significant improvement in the 17 Pro over the 16 Pro. This will be down to the ~700 mAh increase in the battery size. The 17 Pro Max has also received a larger battery over the 16 Pro Max but is more modest at ~400 mAh.
When it comes to efficiencies, the changes between the 15 & 16 models were relatively small, but the 17 has made a big improvement across the board. Particularly the base and Pro models. This could be down to hardware or software or both.
Conclusions
The EU regulatory data is a mine information and allows an agnostic view across models through controlled and objective tests which was not previously possible through the ad hoc tests performed by enthusiasts.
There is a very large and diverse market for mobile phones which is not observed by simply looking at the popular or market leaders only. The popular manufacturers represent only a seventh of the market in terms of models available.
The large diversity masks some of the utility of the Energy Markings, but in looking at the popular 5,000 mAh rated battery capacity there is a really clear difference between classes. If battery efficiency matters to you, then aiming for the best class will make a difference.
There is a lot more that could be done with this data and it will be interesting to see how things change over time as manufacturers, like Apple, respond to the regulations.