Goal Zero Yeti 300 vs Bluetti AC2A
Side-by-side on the specs that decide it — surge, capacity, runtime and price.
Both models' specs verified against manufacturer listings · Last updated
The short answer
Bluetti AC2A costs $100 less. Whether that gap is worth closing depends on what you need to run.
- Goal Zero Yeti 300 holds 46% more energy (297Wh vs 204Wh), so it runs the same load proportionally longer.
- Bluetti AC2A is 5.8 lb lighter (7.9 lb vs 13.7 lb).
- Goal Zero Yeti 300 is rated for 4,000 cycles vs 3,000 — meaningful if you cycle it daily.
Neither of these will start a sump pump or well pump — both surge below the ~3,400W those motors need. If home backup with pumps is your use case, look at higher-surge models instead of either of these.
Goal Zero's compact entry: rugged and IPX4-rated, but you pay a premium over similar-capacity rivals for the drop-and-splash toughness.
Best for: Overlanders and job sites where the unit gets wet and knocked around.
Where it falls short:
- 350W output runs devices, not appliances
- $299 for 297Wh is pricey per watt-hour
One of the cheapest LiFePO4 stations on the market. 204Wh is tiny, but a 200W solar input that outpaces the capacity makes it a surprisingly capable little off-grid trickle unit.
Best for: Ultralight campers who recharge from a panel daily.
Where it falls short:
- 204Wh is genuinely small
- 300W output is device-only
| Spec | Goal Zero Yeti 300 | Bluetti AC2A |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $299 | $199 |
| Capacity | 297 Wh | 204 Wh |
| Continuous output | 350 W | 300 W |
| Surge output | 600 W | 600 W |
| Battery | LiFePO4 | LiFePO4 |
| Rated cycles | 4,000 | 3,000 |
| Weight (lighter wins) | 13.7 lb | 7.9 lb |
| Max solar | 300 W | 200 W |
| Recharge time (faster wins) | 50 min | 1h 30m |
Runtime head-to-head
| Appliance | Goal Zero Yeti 300 | Bluetti AC2A |
|---|---|---|
| Refrigerator | ❌ | ❌ |
| Mini fridge | 8.0 hrs | 5.5 hrs |
| Chest freezer | ❌ | ❌ |
| CPAP machine | 6.3 hrs | 4.3 hrs |
| Sump pump | ❌ | ❌ |