Collaborative Robot Price: The Arm Is Under Half the Cell Cost

“The collaborative robot price we found online and the quotation we received from a distributor differ by more than a factor of two. We cannot tell where the extra cost comes from, and we cannot explain how many years it will take to pay back.” We often hear this from production engineering managers and purchasing staff at Japanese plants in Rayong, Chonburi and Ayutthaya, Thailand. Here is the conclusion first: almost every collaborative robot price you find in a search is the price of the robot arm alone. Measured against the total cost of the “cell” (the robot system) that actually runs on your shop floor, the arm accounts for less than half.

There is one more important conclusion. What determines the payback period is not how big a discount you got on the arm, but “how many shifts you run, how many machines one robot tends, and how many people’s worth of work you can take off the process.” That is why, before comparing quotations, you need to align the following three things.

• Break down the total of each quotation into the same six cost items (arm / end effector / base and part infeed and outfeed / safety / SI / FAT, SAT and training)
• Decide the operating conditions first (number of shifts, number of machines one robot tends, and the work that remains for people after automation)
• Build the additional assessment and documentation work on the SI side, which increased with the revised safety standard (ISO 10218:2025), into the safety and SI cost items

Note that all amounts, headcounts and years in this article relating to “Model Plant K” (described below) are original estimates and assumptions created for this article. They are neither industry averages nor survey results. Please read them as a calculation template to be replaced with your own figures.

The Collaborative Robot Market and Price Trends in 2026

IFR: cobots have settled at about one tenth of installations, and for the first time grew more slowly than the overall market

On September 24, 2026, the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) published its annual report “World Robotics 2026.” According to the IFR, new installations of industrial robots worldwide in 2025 reached 603,000 units (up 11% year on year), exceeding 600,000 units for the first time. The operational stock stands at 5.079 million units (up 9%). The IFR forecasts 655,000 installations in 2026.

For collaborative robots, the IFR reports 66,000 new installations in 2025, or 11% of all industrial robots. Growth was 7%, and according to the IFR, this is the first time since statistics began that cobot growth has fallen below the growth of the overall industrial robot market. In other words, rather than saying “cobots are expanding rapidly,” it is more accurate to say “cobots have become an established option accounting for about one tenth of installations, and their growth has slowed.”

China stands out as the destination. According to the IFR, 59% of new installations in 2025 were in China (354,000 units, up 20%), and Chinese manufacturers reached a 55% share of the Chinese market. Note, however, that this figure covers industrial robots as a whole, not the share of Chinese manufacturers in collaborative robots specifically.

Interact Analysis: in China, the decline in price per unit has nearly stopped

On June 2, 2026, the research firm Interact Analysis announced that global cobot shipments in 2025 were about 57,000 units (up 14.5% year on year), with revenue of more than USD 1.2 billion (up 10.5%). This differs from the IFR’s 66,000 units because the two use different definitions and survey methods, so the figures cannot be mixed in a calculation. In this article, we always state which source a figure comes from.

On the price side, the notable point is the change in average revenue per unit in the Chinese market reported by Interact Analysis. According to the firm, in China this fell by 7.9% in 2024, while the decline in 2025 was only 0.35%, and the firm says price competition in China is easing. China’s share of shipments is 54.7%, which it forecasts will reach 61.4% by 2030. Its outlook for 2030 is 128,918 units shipped worldwide, a compound annual growth rate of 17.3%.

What this tells us is that even in the Chinese market, where price competition had continued, price declines have paused, which weakens the case for postponing a decision on the grounds that “if we wait a little longer, arms will get cheaper.” As we show later, differences in arm price have little effect on the payback period in the first place.

New high-payload, high-speed models are changing the assumption that “collaborative means small and slow”

Products are changing too. In April 2026, ABB Robotics announced its “PoWa” series of collaborative robots, with payloads from 7 to 30 kg (six classes) and a maximum speed of 5.8 m/s (as reported by The Robot Report; pricing not disclosed). ABB expects the global cobot market to grow 20% per year through 2028, but this is the company’s own outlook and is separate from the IFR’s 2025 results (up 7%).

On May 12, 2025, Universal Robots also announced the “UR15” (15 kg payload, up to 17.5 kg for palletizing), its fastest model with a TCP speed of up to 5 m/s. According to the company, it can shorten pick-and-place cycle times by up to 30% compared with existing UR robots. The arrival of such new models shows that collaborative robots need to be compared not only on price, but also on cycle time and application.

Movements in Thailand’s sales network

In Thailand, too, larger-volume deployments are appearing. On February 5, 2025, Doosan Robotics announced that it had signed an MOU with VRNJ, a Thai robot system integrator, for the supply of 300 cobots. According to the company, the first firm order is for 60 units, to be delivered over two years. In addition, the research firm MarketsandMarkets forecasts that the Thai cobot market will grow from USD 27.4 million in 2025 to USD 88.7 million in 2030 (a compound annual growth rate of 26.5%) (this is the firm’s own estimate, and its method is not disclosed).

For the overall picture of introducing cobots in Thailand, see also How to implement collaborative robots in Thailand.

Collaborative Robot Price: Examples of Listed Prices for the Arm

Major manufacturers do not publish official list prices

The first thing to understand is that major manufacturers such as Universal Robots and FANUC do not publish official price lists to the general public. The “collaborative robot prices” you see online are listed prices on sales platforms or at resellers, or estimates by industry websites and other companies. All figures below are “examples of listed prices as of the survey date (October 6, 2026).” They are neither manufacturer list prices nor selling prices in Thailand.

Even within the same 5 kg class, listed prices vary widely. For example, the listed price of the DOBOT Nova 5 at Top 3D Shop is about 40% of the listed price of the UR5e at Vention. However, this compares reference figures from different sales channels, and neither the scope of supply nor the maintenance terms are aligned. This is not a question of which is better or worse; read it as an example showing that “listed prices alone cannot be compared.” For the FANUC CRX-5iA as well, the description of what is included on its listing page is not consistent with the others, so we cannot state that “this is the price for the robot alone.”

Guideline ranges from industry websites and peripheral manufacturers

Some industry websites offer guideline price ranges. Note that each of these is the view of the respective company.

• Gripper manufacturer Robotiq, in a blog post on February 25, 2025, puts the price of an arm alone at anywhere from “USD 15,000 for an entry-level Chinese model” to “over USD 60,000 for a top-end model.”
• Qviro, in a survey of 56 models (updated September 10, 2026), puts the average cobot price at EUR 27,158, and by payload at about EUR 25,000 for 5 kg, about EUR 35,000 for 10 kg and about EUR 45,000 for 15 kg. The article does not clearly state its data sources, but it does show the tendency that “the larger the payload, the higher the price, almost proportionally.”
• Cobot manufacturer Standard Bots, in an article on October 3, 2025, estimates price ranges for each UR model (for example, USD 30,000 to 45,000 for the UR5e). These are estimates by a competing manufacturer that promotes its own products as a lower-cost option, not official prices.

What listed prices do not include

You cannot use a listed price as your budget in Thailand as it stands. Prices on overseas sales websites do not include at least the following.

• The effect of exchange rates, since prices are in US dollars or euros
• Shipping, import taxes and customs clearance costs
• Support, maintenance and spare-parts inventory costs from a distributor in Thailand
• Taxes on domestic transactions in Thailand, such as value-added tax

In this article, we do not convert dollar or euro listed prices into baht. The result would depend on the exchange rate and its date, and the costs above would be added on top. The model calculations in the following sections are set as assumed values in baht from the start.

Cobot Cell Total Cost Breakdown: Viewing the Cell Total in Six Cost Items

An arm alone does not run on the shop floor

Robotiq explains that an arm is of no use on its own, and that the end effector (hand), integration and software cost extra. As industry guidelines for the total cost of a cell, Qviro says that “the total comes to two to three times the price of the arm alone,” while Standard Bots says that “a complete cobot cell often costs USD 40,000 to 150,000” and that “integration can cost as much as the robot itself” (the latter is the view of a robot manufacturer itself).

On the other hand, we could find no reliable statistics published by international bodies or analysts on “what percentage of the cell total the arm accounts for.” Some articles online give percentage breakdowns, but their figures contradict one another. So in this article, instead of statistics, we show the breakdown using a quotation example from a model plant.

Assumptions for Model Plant K

• A Japanese automotive parts manufacturer (machining) in Rayong Province, Thailand
• Replacing part loading and unloading on CNC lathes (machine tending), plus post-machining visual checks and tray packing, with a collaborative robot
• Currently, one operator is assigned to each CNC machine per shift
• Annual labor cost per operator assumed at 20,000 THB per month, or 240,000 THB per year (an assumed value that includes overtime, bonuses, social security, benefits, and hiring and turnover costs; it is not the minimum wage itself)
• Even after automation, 0.25 person’s worth of work per shift remains for material replenishment, changeovers and monitoring (the people assigned to the process do not drop to zero)
• Annual operating costs (maintenance contract, spare parts, software updates) of 100,000 THB per year

Breakdown of the quoted total for one cell (one CNC machine)

In this model, the robot arm is 1,200,000 ÷ 2,700,000 = about 44%. Put another way, the cell total is 2.25 times the arm. This falls within Qviro’s guideline of “two to three times,” but it is only one quotation example, and the ratio varies greatly by process and workpiece.

Looking at the breakdown, the largest item other than the arm is SI (550,000 THB). This covers “work specific to that plant,” such as signal exchange with the CNC lathe, adjusting gripping positions on the workpiece, and programs for each product type. The next largest is the base and part infeed/outfeed (350,000 THB), the mechanism that lets the robot pick up the workpiece in the same position every time. In machine tending, how well this part is built determines the cycle time and the number of stoppages.

If a distributor sends a quotation as a “lump sum,” you cannot see where the gap with the arm price you saw online comes from. Asking for the quotation to be split into the six cost items is the starting point for comparison.

Cost Items That Grew with the Revised Safety Standard: ISO 10218:2025 and Collaborative Applications

“Collaborative applications,” not “collaborative robots”

The safety standards for industrial robots, ISO 10218-1/-2, were revised in 2025. According to a paper by Hartmann et al. published on arXiv in February 2026 (which may not yet be peer-reviewed), the 2025 edition normatively integrated most of the requirements of the cobot technical specification ISO/TS 15066:2016 into Part 2 (ISO 10218-2:2025). The term “collaborative robot” was removed, and “collaborative application” and “collaborative task” were defined instead.

What this means for quotations is that safety is not determined by the robot alone, but by a risk assessment of the application as a whole. If you build a quotation on the assumption that “we bought a collaborative robot, so we don’t need a safety fence,” the risk assessment may show that area sensors, speed limits or layout changes are needed, and the safety cost item may grow afterward.

Main additional requirements cited in the paper

According to the paper, the 2025 edition mainly added the following requirements.

• Cybersecurity (threat assessment, protection of communication interfaces, authentication, etc.)
• Robot classification (Class I is a manipulator mass of 10 kg or less, a maximum force of 50 N or less and a speed of 250 mm/s or less; anything above that is Class II)
• Carrying out the risk assessment in accordance with ISO 12100:2010
• Integrators must state in the instruction manual the biomechanical limit values, contact body regions and effective mass for PFL (power and force limiting) applications, the performance levels of safety functions, and cybersecurity features

In addition, collaborative applications require measurement of biomechanical quantities. The paper concludes that the administrative and technical burden on integrators increases significantly.

How to build this into quotations

We could find no published quantitative figure on, for example, what percentage safety assessment costs increase because of the revision. However, according to the paper’s analysis, the assessment and documentation work done by integrators has increased. When comparing quotations, check whether the safety cost item states “who performs the risk assessment, and which deliverables (report, measurement records, instruction manual content) will be delivered.” A quotation with an extremely small safety item may not include this work.

Note that we have not been able to confirm whether this standard has been adopted in Thailand as a Thai Industrial Standard (TIS) or otherwise. For conformity decisions such as which requirements your application falls under or whether a fence can be omitted, please confirm individually with a specialist or a certification body. We explain the revision as a whole in detail in Industrial robot implementation and the key points of ISO 10218.

Cobot ROI Payback: Model Calculations for Three Cases

From here, we calculate the payback period using the assumptions for Model Plant K. The simple payback period is “quoted total ÷ annual net benefit,” and the annual net benefit is “labor cost reduction − annual operating costs.” The 5-year cumulative figure is “annual net benefit × 5 − quoted total”; if it is positive, the investment has paid for itself within five years.

Case 1: a 10% discount on the arm barely changes the payback period (two shifts)

First, consider one CNC machine running on two shifts.

• Current labor cost: 2 people × 240,000 = 480,000 THB per year
• Work remaining after automation: 0.25 person × 2 shifts = 0.5 person → 0.5 × 240,000 = 120,000 THB per year
• Labor cost reduction: 480,000 − 120,000 = 360,000 THB per year
• Annual net benefit: 360,000 − 100,000 = 260,000 THB per year
• Simple payback: 2,700,000 ÷ 260,000 = about 10.4 years
• 5-year cumulative: 260,000 × 5 − 2,700,000 = 1,300,000 − 2,700,000 = −1,400,000 THB

Now suppose the purchasing team works hard and wins a 10% discount (120,000 THB) on the robot arm. The quoted total becomes 2,580,000 THB, the simple payback is 2,580,000 ÷ 260,000 = about 9.9 years, and the 5-year cumulative is −1,280,000 THB. The discount shortens the payback period by less than half a year (about 0.46 years). That is because the 120,000 THB arm discount is only about 4.4% of the 2,700,000 THB total.

Case 2: moving to three shifts (24-hour operation including night shift) shortens payback by more than four years

Now run the same cell on three shifts.

• Current labor cost: 3 people × 240,000 = 720,000 THB per year
• Work remaining after automation: 0.25 person × 3 shifts = 0.75 person → 0.75 × 240,000 = 180,000 THB per year
• Labor cost reduction: 720,000 − 180,000 = 540,000 THB per year
• Annual net benefit: 540,000 − 100,000 = 440,000 THB per year
• Simple payback: 2,700,000 ÷ 440,000 = about 6.1 years
• 5-year cumulative: 440,000 × 5 − 2,700,000 = 2,200,000 − 2,700,000 = −500,000 THB

Although the quoted total has not changed by a single baht, the payback period drops from about 10.4 years with two shifts to about 6.1 years, about 4.2 years shorter. Compared with the arm discount (about 0.46 years), the difference in impact is obvious. Even so, the investment is not yet fully recovered within five years.

Case 3: one robot tends two CNC machines (two-machine tending) plus three shifts

Next, consider “two-machine tending,” where one robot handles part loading and unloading for two adjacent CNC machines.

• Add the interface with the second CNC and layout changes: +400,000 THB → quoted total 3,100,000 THB
• Current headcount: 2 CNC machines × 3 shifts = 6 people
• Work remaining after automation: replenishment and changeovers for two machines at 0.5 person per shift × 3 shifts = 1.5 people
• Labor cost reduction: 6 × 240,000 − 1.5 × 240,000 = 1,440,000 − 360,000 = 1,080,000 THB per year
• Annual net benefit: 1,080,000 − 100,000 = 980,000 THB per year
• Simple payback: 3,100,000 ÷ 980,000 = about 3.2 years
• 5-year cumulative: 980,000 × 5 − 3,100,000 = 4,900,000 − 3,100,000 = +1,800,000 THB

We set the remaining work at 0.5 person per shift because it is two machines’ worth of the 0.25 person in Case 2. The quoted total is 400,000 THB higher than in Cases 1 and 2, but payback shrinks to about 3.2 years and the 5-year cumulative turns positive.

Conditions under which the Case 3 assumptions break down

The two-machine tending calculation holds only when all of the following conditions are met.

• The CNC machining cycle is sufficiently longer than the robot’s loading and unloading time (if both machines finish at the same time, one CNC has to wait and output falls)
• Both CNC machines process the same product family and can be handled with the same gripper
• There are no changeovers at night (if no one on the night shift can do a changeover, the cell stops at product changes)

If any of these breaks down, the remaining work increases or output falls, and the figure of about 3.2 years no longer holds. It is important to measure machining time and loading/unloading time separately in your current time study.

Cautions to avoid double counting in the calculation

• A labor cost reduction becomes a cash benefit only when that person is redeployed to another process and the corresponding hiring can be stopped. If you cannot reduce headcount, or have nowhere to redeploy people, the benefit in this calculation will not materialize.
• BOI tax incentives are not included in the calculation, because the incentive amount depends on the company’s profits. The positioning is that if you can use the incentives, payback could become even shorter.
• Benefits from improved quality or higher utilization are not included either. In that sense, this calculation is conservative.

We also explain how to structure an ROI calculation in detail in How to think about ROI for robot implementation.

Operating Conditions That Drive Payback: Shifts, Two-Machine Tending and Remaining Work

What the three cases show is that the cost-effectiveness of a collaborative robot depends more on “how you use it” than on “what you pay for it.” If you decide the following operating conditions internally before requesting quotations, both comparing quotations and explaining payback become much easier.

How many shifts to run

Even with the same cell, two shifts and three shifts differ in how many operators can be taken off the process. The harder it is for a plant to hire for night shifts, the greater the value of running the robot at night. However, unless you decide who will recover the cell and how when it stops at night with few people on site, night-time utilization will drop and the benefit will not match the calculation.

How many machines one robot tends

Two-machine tending shortens payback significantly, but processes that meet the conditions listed in the previous section are limited. Candidates are CNC machines with long machining times, lines running the same product family, and locations where the layout lets two machines sit side by side. There are also configurations in which the robot is mounted on a cart or an AMR and moves between several machines, but the approach to positioning and safety changes. We cover this option in Introducing mobile collaborative robots (AMR plus arm).

Take stock of the work that remains for people

Even after automation, material replenishment, changeovers, quality checks and recovery from abnormalities remain. In the model we set this at 0.25 person per machine per shift, but the actual value differs by process. If you calculate as though “one person drops to zero” without estimating the remaining work, you will overestimate the benefit. Break the current work into “loading/unloading,” “inspection,” “replenishment,” “changeover” and “waiting,” measure the time for each, and write down which tasks move to the robot and which stay with people.

Where to redeploy the people taken off the process

As noted in the previous section, a labor cost reduction becomes a cash benefit only when redeployment or a hiring freeze is possible. The automation plan and the staffing plan need to be drawn up at the same time.

Cobot Quotation in Thailand: 12 Items to Align When Comparing Quotes

If you include the following 12 items in your request for proposal (RFP), you can compare each supplier’s quotation on the same yardstick.

1. State the breakdown into the six cost items separately (do not accept lump-sum quotations)
2. Arm model, payload, reach, controller, teach pendant, and scope of software options
3. Number and unit price of end-effector change parts per product type (cost of adding a product type)
4. Safety: who performs the risk assessment and its deliverables, assessment as a collaborative application in line with ISO 10218:2025 (Part 2), whether additional safety devices such as area sensors are included, and the justification if a fence is omitted
5. Signal interface (I/O, communication) with the CNC and existing equipment, and the scope of responsibility for modifying existing equipment
6. Guaranteed cycle time and how it is measured (with loading/unloading time, CNC machining time and waiting time separated)
7. Test items, acceptance criteria and number of actual workpieces used for FAT (factory acceptance test) and SAT (site acceptance test)
8. Training (teaching, changeovers, recovery from abnormalities): who it is for, how many hours, and in which language (Thai, Japanese)
9. Maintenance: scope of the maintenance contract, spare-parts list, response time, and engineers based in Thailand
10. Price validity period, exchange-rate terms, treatment of import taxes and customs clearance costs, and payment terms
11. Warranty period and scope (treatment of consumables such as reducers and cables)
12. Whether the documents needed for a BOI application (machinery list, itemized quotation) can be provided

In particular, unless items 1, 4 and 6 are aligned, you cannot tell whether a difference in quoted amounts is “a difference in content” or “a difference in scope.” For how to choose a system integrator itself, please also refer to How to choose a robot system integrator.

What to Check in FAT/SAT

Whether the conditions agreed at the quotation stage are being met is verified in the FAT (factory acceptance test) and the SAT (site acceptance test). The acceptance criteria are for your company to set. The table below shows examples of how to set them.

Even after passing the FAT, problems can appear in the SAT because of on-site lighting, floor vibration or variation in workpieces. For the FAT, prepare actual workpieces that are as close as possible to the condition in which they flow in mass production.

Thailand-Specific Issues: Labor Costs, BOI, Sales Network and Maintenance, Multilingual Training

Labor costs and the minimum wage

According to a summary by FlowAccount (a Thai accounting software company), the minimum wage revision that took effect on July 1, 2025 is still in force as of October 2026, at 337 to 400 THB per day. By province, Bangkok, Chonburi, Rayong and Chachoengsao are listed at 400 THB, Pathum Thani and Samut Prakan at 372 THB, and Ayutthaya at 357 THB. The effective date and the fact that it remains in force as of October 2026 can also be confirmed with WageIndicator, but we have not been able to check the original Royal Gazette notice. Please confirm the latest amounts individually with the relevant authority.

However, what matters in a cobot decision is less the level of the minimum wage itself and more the fact that “we cannot hire people for the night shift” or “even when we hire them, they don’t stay.” Once you include hiring and training costs and covering vacancies caused by turnover, the actual cost per person is considerably higher than the minimum wage. The 20,000 THB per month we set for Model Plant K is also an assumed value that includes such costs. Please replace it with your own actual figures.

BOI “Smart and Sustainable Industry” measure

The Thailand Board of Investment (BOI) “Smart and Sustainable Industry” measure supports automation investment in existing plants. According to the BOI guide, machinery upgrades and automation in existing businesses can receive exemption from import duties on machinery and a three-year corporate income tax exemption capped at 50% of the improvement investment. If machinery that involves or supports Thailand’s domestic automation industry accounts for 30% or more of the value of the upgraded machinery, the cap rises to 100% of the investment. For existing businesses, the investment must be at least 1,000,000 THB (excluding land and working capital).

According to the BOI, applications under the measure in the first half of 2026 numbered 132, worth about 17.2 billion THB (on an application basis). This shows that applications are continuing in 2026.

What matters in relation to quotations is that the machinery list and itemized quotation become application documents. Under the BOI guide, machinery and equipment count in full toward the investment amount, while software and similar items count in full or at half depending on their category. If you split quotations into the six cost items, you can use them directly to organize your application. Note that some industries, such as general automobile manufacturing, are not eligible, and existing projects that are receiving BOI incentives and are within their corporate income tax exemption period are excluded from the measure for existing businesses. Be sure to confirm individually with the BOI whether your company is eligible and which machinery can be counted, including the application deadline. We explain the details of the measure in BOI corporate income tax exemption for automation investment.

Sales network and maintenance

With collaborative robots, actual utilization depends on whether they can be fixed quickly when they stop. When comparing quotations, check not only the price but also the number of engineers based in Thailand, where spare parts are stocked, and response times. As the MOU between Doosan Robotics and VRNJ mentioned earlier shows, Thailand’s sales network is moving. Maintenance arrangements differ by manufacturer and distributor, so it is important to compare them on the same terms.

Multilingual training

In many cases, it is Thai operators who handle changeovers and recovery from abnormalities. Checking at the quotation stage the display languages of the teach pendant, whether Thai-language changeover and recovery procedures are available, and whether technical documents are available in Japanese can reduce downtime at night. Ask suppliers to state in the training cost item how many hours of training are included and in which language.

A 90-Day Plan for Introducing Collaborative Robots

Divide the first 90 days, from starting to request quotations through to operation, into three stages.

The most important task in the first 30 days is measuring current times. If you have not measured machining time and loading/unloading time separately, you cannot judge whether two-machine tending will work. In days 31 to 60, compare quotations only after fixing the operating conditions; if the conditions differ from one quotation to another, you will not be able to tell why the amounts differ. In days 61 to 90, finalize the test and training plans together with the selected supplier and gather the documents needed for the BOI application.

FAQ on Collaborative Robot Price and Cost

Q1. How much does a collaborative robot cost?

As examples of listed prices for the arm alone, as of the survey date, the Universal Robots UR5e is listed at Vention for 34,527.00 USD (including the control box and teach pendant), the FANUC CRX-10iA/L at Vention for 56,931.82 USD, and the DOBOT Nova 5 at US reseller Top 3D Shop for 13,790.00 USD. However, major manufacturers do not publish official list prices, and these are not selling prices in Thailand. They do not include exchange rates, shipping, import taxes or support costs from a domestic distributor, so please obtain a quotation from a distributor to confirm the price in Thailand.

Q2. What is the breakdown of cobot introduction costs?

In this article’s model calculation (machine tending for one CNC), out of a total of 2,700,000 THB, we set the robot arm at 1,200,000, the end effector at 250,000, the base and part infeed/outfeed at 350,000, safety at 200,000, SI at 550,000, and FAT/SAT, commissioning and training at 150,000 THB. The arm accounts for about 44%, and the total is 2.25 times the arm. This is one quotation example, and the ratio varies by process.

Q3. How many years does it take for a collaborative robot to pay back?

It varies greatly with the number of shifts and the number of machines one robot tends. In this article’s model calculation, payback was about 10.4 years with two shifts and one CNC, about 6.1 years with three shifts and one CNC, and about 3.2 years with three shifts and two-machine tending. By contrast, a 10% discount on the arm only changes about 10.4 years to about 9.9 years. Note also that a labor cost reduction becomes a cash benefit only when redeployment or a hiring freeze is possible.

Q4. With a collaborative robot, is a safety fence unnecessary, so there are no safety costs?

Not necessarily. ISO 10218, revised in 2025, treats the matter as a “collaborative application” rather than a “collaborative robot,” and safety is determined by a risk assessment of the application as a whole. The risk assessment may show that additional safety devices such as area sensors are needed. Please confirm individually with a specialist or a certification body whether a fence can be omitted.

Q5. Is it fine to choose a low-cost cobot from a Chinese manufacturer?

There are large differences in listed prices. For example, even within the same 5 kg class, the listed price of the DOBOT Nova 5 at Top 3D Shop is about 40% of the listed price of the UR5e at Vention. However, these are reference figures with different sales channels and different scopes of supply. Also, in this article’s model the arm is about 44% of the total, so the effect of differences in arm price on the total and on the payback period is smaller than it appears. Regardless of manufacturer, we recommend comparing the maintenance network in Thailand, spare-parts inventory, support languages and cycle time on the same terms when choosing.

Q6. What are the key points when comparing cobot quotations?

The top priority is aligning the breakdown into six cost items, the safety deliverables, and the guaranteed cycle time and how it is measured. Please use the “12 items to align when comparing quotes” in this article by writing them directly into your RFP. In addition, if you decide the operating conditions first, such as the number of shifts and whether two-machine tending is feasible, you can also compare payback periods on the same assumptions.

Summary

• Almost every collaborative robot price you see online is the listed price of the arm alone. Major manufacturers do not publish official list prices, and those prices do not include exchange rates, import taxes or domestic support costs.
• In this article’s model calculation, the arm was about 44% of the 2,700,000 THB total for a one-CNC cell. Compare quotations split into the six cost items.
• With the 2025 revision of ISO 10218, safety is now framed as being determined by a risk assessment of the “collaborative application” as a whole, and the assessment and documentation work on the SI side is said to have increased (according to the paper by Hartmann et al.). It is important not to underestimate the safety cost item.
• What determines the payback period is not the arm discount but the operating conditions. In the model, a 10% arm discount shortened payback by less than half a year, whereas moving to three shifts shortened it by about 4.2 years (to about 6.1 years), and combining this with two-machine tending brought it down to about 3.2 years.
• According to Interact Analysis, the decline in average revenue per unit in the Chinese market slowed to 0.35% in 2025. Rather than waiting for prices to fall, firming up your operating conditions and obtaining quotations will move your decision forward faster.

At TOMAS TECH, we are happy to help from the early stages, such as choosing which process to target or re-splitting the quotations you already have into the six cost items for comparison. If you are considering a collaborative robot and are unsure how to read quotations or how to explain payback, please feel free to contact us through our contact form.

References

• IFR (Five million robots now operate in factories globally): https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/five-million-robots-now-operate-in-factories-globally
• IFR (President’s Report, World Robotics 2026): https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/presidents-report-by-jane-heffner-3-2026
• IFR (World Robotics 2026 press conference presentation): https://ifr.org/downloads/press_docs/Market_Presentation_WR_Press_Conference_2026.pdf
• Interact Analysis (cobot shipment forecast): https://interact-analysis.prezly.com/strong-173-growth-forecast-for-collaborative-robot-shipments-from-2025-30
• Vention (Universal Robots UR5e): https://vention.com/parts/universal-robots-ur5e-collaborative-robot-arm-2445
• Vention (FANUC CRX-5iA): https://vention.com/parts/fanuc-crx-5ia-collaborative-robot-2153
• Vention (FANUC CRX-10iA/L): https://vention.com/parts/fanuc-crx-10ial-collaborative-robot-arm-1922
• Top 3D Shop (DOBOT Nova 5): https://top3dshop.com/product/dobot-nova-5-collaborative-robot
• Standard Bots (Universal Robots price): https://standardbots.com/blog/universal-robot-price
• Qviro (Average cobot price): https://qviro.com/blog/average-cobot-price/
• Robotiq (How much does a cobot cost): https://blog.robotiq.com/how-much-does-a-cobot-cost
• MarketsandMarkets (Thailand collaborative robot market): https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/geography/collaborative-robot-market/Thailand
• Hartmann et al. (comparison of the 2011 and 2025 editions of ISO 10218-1/2, arXiv 2602.17822): https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.17822v1
• Thailand Board of Investment (BOI), Smart and Sustainable Industry measure guide: https://www.boi.go.th/upload/content/Smart_and_Sustainable_Industry.pdf
• Thailand Board of Investment (BOI OSOS), investment applications in the first half of 2026: https://osos.boi.go.th/EN/news/2430/Thailand-Secures-43-6bn-1H-2026-Investment-Surge-as-Big-Tec/
• FlowAccount (Thailand minimum wage): https://flowaccount.com/blog/minimum-wage-rate-in-thailand/
• WageIndicator (Thailand minimum wage): https://wageindicator.org/salary/minimum-wage/thailand
• Doosan Robotics (MOU with VRNJ): https://www.doosanrobotics.com/fr/about/promotion/news/view/85?page=1
• The Robot Report (ABB PoWa): https://www.therobotreport.com/abb-robotics-launches-powa-cobot-family-targeting-industrial-tasks/
• Universal Robots (UR15 announcement): https://www.universal-robots.com/ja/news-and-media/news-center/universalrobot-ur-historys-fastest-high-performance-new-collaborative-robot-ur15-announced/