Technical comparison
Specification contextSpecification rank #12 among dehumidifiers: extraction claim 12 L/day; published noise 41 dB. Published inputs, not our lab test.
Published comparison inputs
Published features
Why the specification score is 69.3
0.1 published litres/day per £1 at the checked price.
41 dB comparison input; test modes may differ.
76.4 published litres/day per kW of nameplate input; environmental conditions may differ.
Published features: 2.5 L tank, laundry mode, continuous drainage, HEPA Filter. Unknown binary inputs receive neutral half-credit.
1 product sources; 1 unique review pools.
Evidence report
What matters, what we know and what is missing
This is a specification-ranked comparison report, not purchase advice. It uses the category evidence profile below and keeps hands-on findings separate from the published specification score.
Observed water extraction with temperature, starting humidity, duration and room conditions.
No exact-model hands-on synthesis is published. This report covers sourced comparison inputs, coverage and open gaps; it makes no claim about real-world performance beyond retained sources.
Inside the bounded published category method.
Across 15 factor-removal and weight-change scenarios.
6 blocking gaps remain.
Category evidence needs, decision cruxes and constraints
Observed water extraction with temperature, starting humidity, duration and room conditions.
Hands-on state: not collectedDirect observation of target accuracy, cycling behaviour and restart logic.
Hands-on state: not collectedHands-on drying results with load, room and elapsed-time context.
Hands-on state: not collectedMeasured or directly observed noise with mode, distance and room context.
Hands-on state: not collectedMeasured consumption by mode and operating conditions.
Hands-on state: not collectedHands-on evidence on tank handling, shutoff, hose drainage and leaks.
Hands-on state: not collectedObserved performance at disclosed lower temperatures, including defrost behaviour.
Hands-on state: not collectedHands-on gate: Require at least one exact-model extraction observation with temperature, humidity and duration disclosed. Broader verdicts should use independent corroboration.
Published litres per day may use different temperature and humidity conditions.
Comparable compressor noise, fan mode and room heat observations are not retained.
- Warranty
- 3 yearssource ↗
- Returns
- not structured
- Safety
- not structured
- Installation or setup
- Continuous drainage is listed.
Normalized decision receipt
13 mapped fields each carry a canonical receipt hash and an origin status. Source access time is kept separate from field observation, so a configured value is not presented as freshly re-extracted.
sha256:2afe9897e097c4e96951874dc87bca431ff3743ab8308d448c2a3a3ea6115e61The score and rank compare retained specification inputs inside this bounded category cohort. They are not a hands-on quality verdict and are not comparable across categories. Open evidence gaps block purchase advice regardless of specification score, rank, offer state or review-synthesis verdict.
Source notes and limitations
Evidence limitations
- Extraction litres/day can be claimed at different temperature and relative-humidity conditions.
- Noise, power and extraction are published specifications, not Agent Review Data measurements.
- An exact manufacturer source was not resolved in this snapshot; the specification receipt is the exact retailer page.
- The tracked offer can change after its checked time.
Recommendation caveats
- Ranking compares published claims and checked price; it is not a controlled extraction test.
- The tracked offer was in stock when checked.
- Extraction claims may use different ambient conditions and should be treated as directional.
- Owner-feedback coverage is too narrow for an internet-wide consensus claim.
Owner feedback across the web
One exact-model review pool is visible. It is trust-adjusted and not presented as internet-wide consensus.
One exact-model commercial review pool. It is pulled toward neutral and is not presented as internet-wide consensus.
Inspect review pool ↗Independent tests and owner discussion
No separate third-party source passed the exact-model check at this refresh.
- No separate editorial, owner-pool or Reddit source was captured for this exact model.
Claim-level trace not yet modelled · 2 of 160 available
This record exposes source-linked inputs and their provenance status, but it does not yet model individual claims, relations and criterion contributions.
Inspect the trace build-out →