IoT is not uniform, depending on your environment the devices that you need to utilize in order to efficiently measure and control the environment (even if you connect the same data for example a simple temperature reading).
Picking the right IoT sensor for a factory use-case is not at all the same as choosing a smart home sensor. Different wireless stacks behave very differently around metal, noise, and concrete. Pick the wrong one and you end up with blind spots, dead batteries, missed alerts, etc.
Comparison at a Glance
There are many technologies, some more suitable than others for certain things, some more popular, others less so. It would be unrealistic to compare them all (even if possible it would be a very lengthy and boring article to be honest).
Thus, we have chosen the following set that incorporates some of the most popular choices, as well as some new and interesting contenders.
DigiMesh
LoRa / LoRaWAN
Classic Wi-Fi (2.4 / 5 GHz)
Wi-Fi HaLow (802.11ah)
Comparison Table
| Criterion | DigiMesh | LoRa / LoRaWAN | Classic Wi-Fi (2.4 / 5 GHz) | Wi-Fi HaLow (802.11ah) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typical use case | Local mesh of sensors / actuators in a hall | Plant or site wide low power sensing | High bandwidth devices, HMIs, gateways | Long range IP sensors, industrial IoT nodes |
| Topology | Peer-to-peer mesh, all routers | Star-of-stars (gateways) | Star (APs and clients) | Star (APs and clients) |
| Frequency band | 2.4 GHz or sub-GHz XBee variants | Sub-GHz ISM (868/915 MHz etc.) | 2.4 / 5 / 6 GHz | Sub-GHz (typically 750–950 MHz) |
| Range (indoor factory) | Tens to low hundreds of meters per hop | Hundreds of meters to more than 1 km | Often 10–50 m per AP through machinery | Hundreds of meters to ~1 km per AP |
| Data rate | Low to moderate (tens–hundreds kbps) | Very low (hundreds bps to tens kbps) | High (Mbps) | Low to moderate (tens of kbps to a few Mbps) |
| Battery life potential | Months to years with sleeping routers | Many years on small batteries | Usually poor, mains or big battery | Much better than classic Wi-Fi, still above LoRaWAN |
| Infrastructure | DigiMesh gateway or coordinator, mesh hops | LoRaWAN gateways + network server | Enterprise or industrial Wi-Fi network | HaLow APs, often fewer than classic Wi-Fi |
| Vendor / ecosystem | Proprietary Digi protocol | Open LoRaWAN ecosystem | Mature, multi vendor | Newer but growing industrial ecosystem |
The Devil is in the Details
The table above is a good starting point and can potentially be enough for someone that needs some guidance on where to get started.
We are going to go one step further though and go into more detail. Insight is always useful and the deeper it is the better one can make an informed choice that has a higher likelihood of being the right one for the specific application/use-case.
DigiMesh
What it is
DigiMesh is a proprietary mesh networking technology used on Digi XBee modules at 2.4 GHz and sub-GHz. Every node can route, so the network is homogeneous and peer-to-peer rather than parent/child like many Zigbee style meshes.
Key traits:
Peer-to-peer mesh: All nodes can route and are interchangeable.
Self healing: Routes automatically rebuild when nodes move, fail, or links change. This introduces an additional level of robustness, very important for industrial applications.
Sleeping routers: DigiMesh explicitly supports sleeping routers, coordinated by an always-on “sleep coordinator”. That allows battery powered nodes that still participate in routing. This is a big advantage over normal APs like the ones used in Wi-Fi.
Medium range, medium data rate: More range than classic Wi-Fi at similar power when using sub-GHz, at the same time data rate is significantly higher than LoRaWAN, so applications like Vibration monitoring are still possible.
Pros in a factory
Good for dense clusters of machines where cabling is hard. Perfect for retrofitting existing wired sensors.
Mesh helps route around metal obstacles and RF shadows, extending range beyond what a single hop network (Wi-Fi) would provide.
Sleeping routers make a fully battery powered mesh realistic.
Fits moderate data rate workloads such as vibration monitoring, current readings, or configuration data. This is one of its key advantages over LoRaWAN as it makes it a lot better suited for Data-heavy industrial applications that require advanced AI data analysis. For example it makes predictive maintenance possible where it would not be viable with a LoRaWAN sensor.
Cons
Proprietary and mostly tied to Digi XBee hardware and ecosystem. This can make it costly and vendor locking might become an issue. NCD.io+1
Mesh routing adds complexity as the node count grows, harder to mange and deploy.
For very large plants you either need many hops or multiple gateways, this puts a burden on deployment cost and maintenance fees.
LoRaWAN
What it is
LoRa is a long range chirp spread spectrum (CSS) modulation in sub-GHz ISM bands. LoRaWAN adds the MAC and network layer on top, using a star-of-stars topology with gateways forwarding device traffic to a network server, making it a complete network protocol that builds on to of LoRa.
Key traits:
Very long range: Multiple sources and real deployments show plant and campus wide coverage with only a few gateways, and line-of-sight ranges up to many kilometers. There are even city-wide networks that need only a few 10s of gateways to cover a mid-sized town.
Ultra low power: Devices that send a few small packets per hour can realistically reach 5–10 year battery life, depending on link budget (when operating under favorable network conditions) and battery size.
Small payloads and low duty cycle: You trade throughput and latency for range and battery life. There is no way around this limitation, in the world of telecommunications you pay for one with the other.
Pros in a factory
Cover entire plants or sites with just 1-2 gateways. This significantly reduces deployment costs.
Ideal for battery powered sensors that should last years with minimal maintenance. This not only saves on the device costs, but also (and more importantly) removes the need of frequent sensor maintenance (set and forget).
Infrastructure cost per sensor is low once gateways and backend are in place (see previous points), which makes network scaling very easy and cost efficient once the initial deployment has been take care of.
Keeps OT data separate from the office Wi-Fi network by default, enhancing security and reliability.
Cons
Not suitable for high data rates or continuous streams (Vibration monitoring is out of the question).
Latency and duty cycle constraints make it less suited for tight, deterministic control loops.
Packet sizes are small. For rich data you need local preprocessing, so AI is a challenge (edge AI might solve this in the future)
Wi-Fi (Classic and HaLow)
Classic Wi-Fi (2.4 / 5 GHz)
Classic Wi-Fi was built for laptops and phones, not coin cell sensors. It focuses on high throughput and low latency, typically at 2.4, 5, or 6 GHz.
Pros
Very high throughput for cameras, HMIs, and data loggers.
Uses existing enterprise Wi-Fi infrastructure and IT tooling.
Huge multi vendor ecosystem and staff familiarity.
Cons
- Power hungry: Radios stay on often and association/packet overhead adds up, which is why battery powered Wi-Fi sensors are rare or use very aggressive sleep strategies.
- Limited penetration in dense industrial environments at 2.4 and 5 GHz compared to sub-GHz alternatives.
- 2.4 GHz is already busy (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Zigbee and others), which can mean interference and jitter.
Where classic Wi-Fi fits
Wi-Fi HaLow (802.11ah)
What it is
Wi-Fi HaLow is part of the Wi-Fi family but operates in the sub-1 GHz band instead of 2.4/5 GHz, and it is tuned for IoT. It uses narrower channels, more efficient modulation and sleep mechanisms to provide long range, better wall penetration, and lower power than classic Wi-Fi while still speaking IP natively.
Key traits:
Sub-GHz operation: Better propagation through walls and metal clutter, with indoor coverage measured in hundreds of meters and outdoor coverage up to around a kilometer or more per AP in many tests.
Balanced throughput: Higher data rates than LoRaWAN, lower than classic Wi-Fi at wide channels, but efficient at low bandwidths so it can trade range vs throughput.
Low power for Wi-Fi: Designed with aggressive power saving, target wake time features and sleep scheduling so that IoT nodes can run on batteries.
High device density: Single AP can theoretically serve thousands of stations, which is attractive for large sensor fleets.
Recent industry demos even show Wi-Fi HaLow used as a long range wireless backhaul for LoRaWAN gateways, replacing Ethernet where wiring is painful.
Pros
Much better range and penetration than classic Wi-Fi while staying in the Wi-Fi ecosystem. asiarf.com+1
IP native: Devices look like any other IP endpoint; no special LPWAN servers required.
Power profile suitable for IoT and significantly better than classic Wi-Fi for battery powered nodes.
Emerging industrial modules and chipsets specifically for IIoT.
Cons
Ecosystem is newer than LoRaWAN or classic Wi-Fi, with fewer off the shelf products today.
Not as ultra low power for tiny, ultra sparse sensors as a well tuned LoRaWAN device.
Requires new APs that support HaLow, not your existing enterprise 2.4/5 GHz access points.
The Trade-offs That Matter on the Factory Floor
Range and Coverage
LoRaWAN still wins on raw range and penetration with small payloads and low data rate. One gateway can see across large plants when placed well.
DigiMesh gives moderate per hop range but uses multi hop mesh to route around obstacles and reach across a hall or line.
Classic Wi-Fi has the shortest useful range in heavy industrial layouts and often needs many APs to cover every corner.
Wi-Fi HaLow sits between LoRaWAN and classic Wi-Fi: sub-GHz plus Wi-Fi PHY gives hundreds of meters indoor, kilometer scale outdoor, and strong wall penetration.
What this means
For site wide sensing with relatively simple payloads, LoRaWAN is hard to beat.
For long corridors or big halls where you want IP and a bit more data, HaLow becomes very attractive.
For local clusters of machines, DigiMesh or HaLow can cover everything with a handful of nodes or APs. DigiMesh is king for now though as it has a very well developed ecosystem.
Power and Battery Life
LoRaWAN is built for multi year battery life, sometimes reaching 5–10 years with the right battery and transmit schedule.
DigiMesh supports sleeping routers and is considered low power among mesh stacks, but each routing hop still costs energy.
Classic Wi-Fi is generally the worst choice for long battery life unless you are very aggressive with duty cycles.
Wi-Fi HaLow focuses on low power for IoT, using efficient sleep and wake mechanisms. It can support long battery life, especially when payloads are moderate, but typical devices will still use more energy than LoRaWAN for the same sparse traffic.
What this means
If your requirement sounds like “small sensor, coin cell, 5 to 10 year life”, LoRaWAN remains the default. DigiMesh and HaLow both make sense when you need more bandwidth but still care about months or a few years of battery life. Classic Wi-Fi is mainly reserved for mains powered equipment.
Data Rate and Latency
Classic Wi-Fi delivers high throughput and low latency, ideal for cameras, HMIs, and PC class devices.
Wi-Fi HaLow offers a balance: significantly higher throughput than LoRaWAN and DigiMesh in many regimes, especially per link, while keeping power under control.
DigiMesh sits in the low to medium band: good for sensor data, configuration, and occasional larger uploads (Vibration monitoring raw data on demand), while still keeping range high and power consumption low.
LoRaWAN is deliberately slow and constrained, best for small sensor frames and infrequent updates.
What this means
Use classic Wi-Fi when you need continuous high rate data.
Use HaLow or DigiMesh for richer sensor data and configuration without going all the way to classic Wi-Fi’s power draw.
Use LoRaWAN for simple status and environmental measurements.
Robustness and Reliability
All four can be deployed reliably if designed correctly:
LoRaWAN uses spread spectrum and sub-GHz propagation to punch through obstacles and noise.
DigiMesh relies on multi hop mesh and self healing routes, so traffic can go around blocked paths.
Classic Wi-Fi benefits from mature enterprise grade management, but operates in crowded bands and can suffer more from interference.
Wi-Fi HaLow keeps Wi-Fi level robustness but moves to sub-GHz, where penetration is better and interference from consumer gear is lower.
Network Architecture and Scalability
LoRaWAN scales very well in terms of number of nodes per gateway and across a plant. Duty cycle and fair access rules still apply. NCD.io+1
DigiMesh scales comfortably to tens or hundreds of nodes in a mesh; beyond that, route management and latency need careful testing.
Classic Wi-Fi is mature at enterprise scale for laptops and phones, but thousands of tiny sensor clients can be challenging in terms of airtime and management.
Wi-Fi HaLow is designed to support large numbers of stations per AP, making dense IoT deployments more realistic than with classic Wi-Fi. ResearchGate+1
Security and IT Integration
Classic Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi HaLow can share the same security stack: WPA3, RADIUS, VLANs, and the same IP based monitoring tools. HaLow is essentially Wi-Fi tuned for IoT. It is also a part of the Wi-Fi Alliance, this give it long term support prospects.
LoRaWAN uses end to end AES keys at the MAC layer and is naturally segmented away from corporate networks. NCD.io+1
DigiMesh security is application dependent, usually living in the OT segment behind a Digi or custom gateway.
What this means
If your IT team wants strict segmentation between OT and IT, LoRaWAN and dedicated DigiMesh networks help a lot. If they want everything under a unified Wi-Fi security model, HaLow is far easier to align than LoRaWAN or proprietary mesh.
Which Should You Use When?
Think in terms of use cases and constraints, not protocol fashion, there is no universal solution when it comes to Industrial applications as they are very scenario specific.
LoRaWAN
You need plant or campus wide coverage with minimal infrastructure.
Devices must be small and battery powered with minimal maintenance.
Traffic is small, periodic sensor data.
You want an open, multi vendor device ecosystem.
Examples:
Temperature and humidity monitoring across multiple halls.
Energy meters on every floor and panel.
Level sensors in tanks, silos, or remote yards.
DigiMesh
You have clusters of machines in a hall that need a resilient local mesh.
Some nodes are battery powered, but you need more data than LoRaWAN can comfortably move.
You want self healing mesh behavior without running a LoRaWAN stack or new Wi-Fi HaLow APs.
Examples:
Condition monitoring around a specific line or machine cell.
Retrofitting legacy machines where cabling is impossible but you can drop in a DigiMesh gateway.
Wi-Fi Classic
Devices are mains powered.
You need high throughput and low latency, or you are streaming bulk data.
You want tight integration with the existing enterprise Wi-Fi and IT tools.
Examples:
Cameras and visual inspection systems.
HMIs, maintenance laptops, and high rate data loggers.
Gateways or edge computers aggregating data from LoRaWAN, DigiMesh, or wired buses.
Wi-Fi HaLow
You want IP native sensors but need better range and penetration than classic Wi-Fi.
You need more throughput than LoRaWAN but still care about battery life and large device counts.
You prefer a Wi-Fi style security and management story rather than LPWAN specific backends.
Examples:
Long corridor or warehouse monitoring where one HaLow AP can cover where several classic APs would be needed. asiarf.com+1
Industrial gateways and controllers scattered across a plant that must stay IP native but are hard to cable.
Mixed fleets where some sensors use LoRaWAN and backhaul rides on Wi-Fi HaLow instead of Ethernet.
Hybrid Architectures: Often the Real Answer
In real factories you rarely pick just one technology. Typical patterns:
LoRaWAN for low data, long life sensing across the entire site.
DigiMesh or wired fieldbuses for dense local clusters around specific equipment.
Wi-Fi HaLow for long range IP connectivity to gateways and higher rate sensors.
Classic Wi-Fi / Ethernet for HMIs, PCs, cameras, and upstream connectivity.
Recent demos even show LoRaWAN gateways using Wi-Fi HaLow as their long range backhaul instead of Ethernet, which is attractive when it is expensive to pull cable between buildings or across the site. TechRadar+1
Gateways glue all of this together so your applications see clean APIs and data streams rather than four separate RF islands.