Carrier 30AWH014HP9 vs FoxESS HP1-12-E
SCOP (35 °C): Carrier 30AWH014HP9 4.48, FoxESS HP1-12-E 4.55. The Carrier 30AWH014HP9 is better on 6 of 13 comparable points.
Last updated: + Add a model
Both models in detail
Who wins where
- Carrier 30AWH014HP9
- FoxESS HP1-12-E
Biggest differences
| Fact | 30AWH014HP9 | HP1-12-E |
|---|---|---|
| Refrigerant charge | 1.07 kg | 1.5 kg |
| ISDE grant (NL) | 3,025 € | 3,700 € |
| Rated output 35 °C | 13.8 kW | 12 kW |
| Rated output 55 °C | 13.25 kW | 12 kW |
| Outdoor unit sound power | 54 dB(A) | 52 dB(A) |
| Seasonal efficiency ηs 55 °C | 144 % | 140 % |
Score per area = position (0–100) relative to all 1350 models in this category; higher is better.
| Technical specifications | Carrier30AWH014HP9 | FoxESSHP1-12-E |
|---|---|---|
| Grants & market | ||
| Boiler Upgrade Scheme | £7,500 – £9,000 | £7,500 – £9,000 |
| General | ||
| Type (source) | Air-to-water1 | Air-to-water1 |
| Performance | ||
| Heating capacity (A7/W35) | – | 11.43 kW2 |
| Rated output 35 °C | 13.8 kW✓1 | 12 kW3 |
| Rated output 55 °C | 13.25 kW✓1 | 12 kW3 |
| Efficiency | ||
| SCOP (35 °C) | 4.481 | 4.55✓3 |
| SCOP (55 °C) | 3.68✓1 | 3.583 |
| Seasonal efficiency ηs 35 °C | 176 %1 | 179 %✓3 |
| Seasonal efficiency ηs 55 °C | 144 %✓1 | 140 %3 |
| Energy label 35 °C | – | A+++3 |
| Energy label 55 °C | – | A++3 |
| COP A7/W35 | 4.41 | 4.41 |
| COP A-7/W35 | 2.74✓1 | 2.721 |
| SEER (cooling) | 5.151 | – |
| Noise | ||
| Outdoor unit sound power | 54 dB(A)1 | 52 dB(A)✓3 |
| Refrigerant | ||
| Refrigerant | R2901 | R2901 |
| Refrigerant GWP | 34 | 32 |
| Refrigerant charge | 1.07 kg✓1 | 1.5 kg1 |
| Electrical | ||
| Max. power input | 10.5 kW1 | 6.6 kW1 |
| Connectivity & smart | ||
| SG Ready | No1 | Yes✓1 |
| Grants & market | ||
| ISDE grant (NL) | 3,025 €4 | 3,700 €✓5 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is better: the Carrier 30AWH014HP9 or the FoxESS HP1-12-E?
SCOP (35 °C): Carrier 30AWH014HP9 4.48, FoxESS HP1-12-E 4.55. The Carrier 30AWH014HP9 is better on 6 of 13 comparable points.
What is the SCOP (35 °C) of the Carrier 30AWH014HP9 and the FoxESS HP1-12-E?
Carrier 30AWH014HP9: 4.48. FoxESS HP1-12-E: 4.55.
Which is better on refrigerant charge: the Carrier 30AWH014HP9 or the FoxESS HP1-12-E?
Carrier 30AWH014HP9: 1.07 kg. FoxESS HP1-12-E: 1.5 kg.
Which is better on ISDE grant (NL): the Carrier 30AWH014HP9 or the FoxESS HP1-12-E?
FoxESS HP1-12-E: 3,700 €. Carrier 30AWH014HP9: 3,025 €.
Related comparisons
How we collect and check this data →
Sources
- List of eligible heat pumps (BEG) — Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle (BAFA) · accessed 27 Sept 2026
- Heat Pump Keymark certificates — EHPA / DIN CERTCO (Heat Pump KEYMARK) · accessed 29 Sept 2026
- European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL) – heat pumps — Europese Commissie · accessed 15 Oct 2026
- ISDE heat pump notification code list — Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland (RVO) · accessed 27 Sept 2026
- ISDE heat pump notification code list — Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland (RVO) · accessed 25 Oct 2026