LoRaWAN vs. Other LPWAN Technologies

LPWAN technologies are designed to send small packets of data over long distances while consuming very little power. They trade off throughput and latency for battery life and coverage, making them ideal for applications like asset tracking, environmental sensing, and remote monitoring.

Pros:

• Operates in unlicensed bands → zero spectrum fees
• Deploy private networks anywhere → full control over coverage
• Strong open-source ecosystem (ChirpStack, The Things Network)
• Multi-year battery life on coin cells

Cons:

• Payload size capped (~50 bytes)
• Duty-cycle limits in some regions (e.g., EU868,US915)

LoRaWAN shines when you need an affordable, self-managed network with flexible gateway placement and multi-year battery life.

Pros:

• Leverages existing cellular infrastructure → nationwide coverage
• High payloads (up to 1600 bytes) and moderate data rates
• SIM-based security and QoS guarantees

Cons:

• Monthly subscription fees per device
• Operator-dependent coverage gaps in rural/indoor environments
• Higher power consumption during registration and handshakes

NB-IoT is ideal for applications requiring larger payloads and carrier-grade SLAs—but at a higher recurring cost.

Pros:

• Ultra-low power consumption → longest battery life (10–15 years)
• Simple uplink-only protocol → easy device integration
• Global managed network in many countries

Cons:

• Very small uplink payloads (12 bytes) and low data rates (~100 bps)
• No downlink flexibility (limited acknowledgments)
• Operator subscription and message-count fees

Use Sigfox when you need device simplicity and extreme battery life, and can tolerate minimal payload sizes.

Pros:

• Full bi-directional LTE feature set → voice support, mobility
• Moderate throughput for firmware updates or richer data
• SIM-based security and managed QoS

Cons:

• Higher power draw than LoRaWAN/NB-IoT
• Monthly per-device fees and spectrum costs
• Coverage and performance tied to carrier network

LTE-M fits use cases needing mobility (e.g., asset tracking), voice, or larger data transfers—at the expense of battery life and cost.

• Budget & TCO: If avoiding spectrum fees and minimizing gateway count are top priorities, LoRaWAN wins.

• Control & Flexibility: Private network deployments—including portable gateways—are a breeze with LoRaWAN.

• Battery Life: While Sigfox can edge out LoRaWAN on absolute longevity, LoRaWAN’s multi-year life on small batteries is still industry-leading.

• Payload Needs: For applications capped under ~50 bytes per message, LoRaWAN delivers the best balance of features.

• Ecosystem & Vendor Support: A massive open-source community plus turnkey commercial gateways/sensors streamline deployment.

With ioX-Connect you can:

• Deploy Private LoRaWAN Networks: Spin up gateways, manage device fleets, and visualize sensor data—all from one cloud platform.

• Compare Performance: Use our dashboard to benchmark link budgets, packet success rates, and ADR efficiency vs. NB-IoT or LTE-M gateways.

• Hybrid Connectivity: Seamlessly ingest LoRaWAN and cellular IoT data into a unified IoT layer—then trigger alerts or CMMS work orders directly from your rules engine.

• 👉 Return to LoRaWAN Technology: The Ultimate Guide

• 📦 Explore our LoRaWAN Hardware Guide and get started with sensor & gateway selection.

• 🛠️ Ready to test LoRaWAN vs. NB-IoT in our environment? Check out our range of LoRaWAN devices or speak to our team to find out about our NB-IoT options.