The outcome is a fiercely-contested ranking that reveals not only who is the best all-round performer, but who is best suited to various commercial cleaning tasks.

At a Glance

 The Robots Behind the Rankings

1. PUDU CC1

Best overall balance for mixed commercial floor cleaning

Overall score 86/100

CC1 leads this assessment through four cleaning modes, useful water capacity and building-oriented automation. PUDU publishes 700–1,000 m²/h cleaning efficiency, 15 L clean-water and 15 L wastewater tanks, and five hours of scrubbing runtime. Its carpet vacuuming assembly and charging or water-management stations are purchased separately. [C1]

Visual and laser SLAM, cleaning reports and automatic servicing with the appropriate station support routine commercial work. Carpet vacuuming is rated at four hours; the nine-hour claim applies to silent mopping. Charging takes under three hours. Parkhotel Eisenstadt provides named CC1 deployment evidence. The lead over Phantas is small, and tighter layouts can favour its rival. [C1, C8]

2. Gausium Phantas

Best for compact sites with both hard floors and carpet

Overall score 85.5/100

Phantas combines vacuuming, sweeping, scrubbing and dust mopping with a minimum passage width of 650 mm. Its practical efficiency is 350–700 m²/h; the much higher theoretical figures should not be used as equivalent coverage. Published working widths are 330 mm for scrubbing and 465 mm for vacuuming or sweeping. [C2]

Its 11.5 L clean-water and 10.5 L wastewater tanks are smaller than CC1’s. Runtime is up to 4.5 hours for scrubbing or vacuuming, six for sweeping and ten for dust mopping, with about two hours charging. Real-time mapping, obstacle recognition and a named Intercontinental Wien installation strengthen its case. Water-handling accessories should be specified in the final quotation. [C2, C3, C9]

3. Cleanfix RA660 Navi XL

Best for intensive wet cleaning of large hard-floor areas

Overall score 84.5/100

This assessment uses the current Generation 2 RA660 Navi XL in a connected configuration with its optional docking station. A 660 mm brush width, stated 1,250 m²/h performance and 110 L membrane tank favour large hard-floor sites. The membrane tank is a shared clean/dirty-water system; it should not be presented as two independent 110 L tanks. [C4]

The manufacturer specifies up to 3.5 hours runtime, 40 minutes to 80% charge and 60 minutes to full charge. The dock refills water, empties wastewater and charges automatically. On-the-spot turning helps manoeuvring, but its 850 mm overall width limits access. Remote monitoring requires the relevant trim/subscription; elevator and fleet integration are Server features. Its specialist scrubbing role limits versatility. [C4]

4. PUDU MT1

Best for collecting larger dry debris in open commercial spaces

Overall score 81/100

MT1 prioritises sweeping and large-debris collection. Its 35 L trash bin is particularly useful on routes where frequent emptying would interrupt work. PUDU quotes up to 1,800 m²/h in standard mode and 6,000 m²/h in spot-cleaning mode; the latter is not full-floor cleaning productivity. [C6]

Runtime is 4–8 hours by cleaning level, with charging under three hours and a 750 mm passage requirement. Visual and laser navigation, AI trash recognition and docking support repeat work. An optional auto-empty station reduces handling; its compatibility should not be assumed for MT1 Vac. The manufacturer documents CC1 and MT1 at SHAOKE Logistics. MT1 cannot replace a wet scrubber or a dedicated carpet vacuum. [C6, C11]

5. PUDU MT1 Vac

Best for high-volume carpet and hard-floor dry cleaning

Overall score 80.5/100

MT1 Vac is a separate model from MT1. It sweeps, vacuums and dust-mops, with a 550 mm vacuuming width and 700 mm sweeping width. PUDU states up to 1,400 m²/h, 14 L of dust-bag capacity and a separate 6 L trash bin. Those capacities serve different waste streams rather than one interchangeable container. [C5]

Its 750 mm passage requirement, floor recognition, rerouting and automatic charging make it attractive for broad mixed-floor dry-cleaning routes. Standard sweep-and-vacuum operation on hard floors is rated at four hours; the overall mode-dependent range is 3–6.5 hours, with charging under 3.5 hours. It does not wet-scrub. Support receives a lower score than CC1 because the reviewed exact-model deployment evidence is less developed. [C5, C10]

6. UBTECH CLEINBOT M79

Large-tank hard-floor cleaner with specification gaps

Overall score 72.5/100  |  Provisional

The requested “CleiBot M79” is treated here as UBTECH’s CLEINBOT M79. Official material describes 70 L clean-water and 50 L wastewater tanks, combined washing/sweeping, laser-and-vision navigation and 3–4 hours of operation at full capacity. Its stated 2,040 m²/h is manufacturer-reported; the reviewed evidence does not establish comparable practical coverage. [C7, C12]

The large tanks favour medium and large hard-floor areas. Digital status monitoring and task reporting are documented, but charging duration, minimum passage width, floor-gradient limits, automated water servicing and named exact-model deployments were not adequately verified. Those gaps constrain the runtime, mobility and support scores. Its provisional position could improve after the exact configuration and support package are confirmed. [C7]

7. LionsBot R3 Vac

A focused vacuuming option for carpeted offices and hotels

Overall score 70/100

R3 Vac is a dry-cleaning specialist, so its position in an all-purpose ranking understates its value for carpet-heavy sites. LionsBot publishes practical efficiency of 500–800 m²/h, a 6 L vacuum tank and a working width of 350 mm, increasing to 550 mm with the side brush. [C13]

Up to three hours runtime and two hours charging mean more docking than several rivals. Automatic recharge, fleet reporting and the compact 482 mm body support indoor workflows; body width is not a certified minimum passage width. LionsBot describes use in a 615-room Singapore hotel. It cannot wash hard floors, and its smaller waste capacity increases handling compared with MT1 Vac. 

The best fit depends on the cleaning task

CC1 and Phantas are the strongest starting points for properties that need both wet and dry cleaning. Cleanfix is more compelling when wet-cleaning throughput, tank capacity and short charging breaks dominate. MT1 and MT1 Vac suit different dry-waste profiles, while R3 Vac remains a credible focused carpet-cleaning option. A lower general score does not make a specialist unsuitable for its intended job.

Ranking Explained

The source assessment treats all five criteria as equally weighted. It uses the documented ROBOT24.com Market Research Database record and avoids assigning edition-specific capabilities that are not supported by the available data. Where exact pricing or support information is missing, that limitation is retained rather than filled with assumptions.

 

Scoring guide: 9–10 indicates a particularly strong, well-documented fit; 7–8 a capable fit with identifiable trade-offs; 5–6 a constrained or incompletely documented fit; 1–4 a material task limitation. Unsupported features earn no positive credit. Where an entire criterion is unresolved, 5 is a neutral placeholder and the overall result is provisional. Missing information is not evidence that a feature is absent.

Why the scores differ: CC1 earns broader cleaning and capacity credit than Phantas, while Phantas earns higher access credit. Cleanfix earns the strongest capacity score with its automated membrane-tank servicing, but its size and wet-only role reduce the site and versatility scores. MT1 Vac has more dry-cleaning breadth than MT1, while MT1 has better debris capacity and longer stated endurance. M79’s unresolved mobility score uses the neutral 5 placeholder. No slope performance or dust capacity is invented where it was not verified.