Quarero vs Ascento: Perimeter Robots Compared

The market for autonomous perimeter patrol in DACH has arrived in procurement practice in 2025. Security leads no longer compare concepts but specific platforms. This text places Quarero Robotics and Ascento side by side. Both vendors are serious, both operate productively in the field, both pursue different technical paths. The decision depends on the terrain, the regulatory obligation, and the balance-sheet logic.

Quarero vs Ascento: Starting Position in the DACH Market

Ascento is an ETH spin-off from Zurich. The Ascento Guard platform is designed as a two-legged wheeled unit, built for uneven outdoor terrain, stairs, and curbs. Quarero Robotics operates rolling patrol units in three documented sensor classes: QR-1, QR-2, and QR-3. Both address the same customer base. Logistics centers, energy infrastructure, industrial parks, water utilities, and hospitals are reference sectors for both vendors.

The procurement decision is usually made by the security lead, occasionally by the plant manager, rarely by the CFO alone. That shapes the comparison. A security lead evaluates failure probability, audit suitability, escalation path, and tariff cost replacement. Platform spectacle is not a selection criterion.

Platform Architecture and Locomotion

Ascento uses a bipedal wheeled hybrid architecture. The unit balances on two wheels and can pass steps, curbs, and narrow staircases. This is mechanically demanding and solves a real problem on sites with old building stock without ramps.

Quarero relies on a four-wheeled patrol base without active balance control. The absence of balancing reduces mechanical failure points. The mean time between failures (MTBF) is structurally higher as a result. QR-2 runs defined routes at speeds up to 6 km/h, weatherproof to IP65. Both platforms are classified as mobile service robots under EN ISO 13482 and thus meet the normative basis for operation in the semi-public industrial environment.

The decision criterion is topography. A plant perimeter with paved paths, gravel, and defined transitions does not need balance control. Anyone managing historic substance with steps and without a ramp budget should seriously evaluate Ascento.

Sensor Depth in Direct Comparison

Ascento Guard combines RGB cameras, microphones, and environment classification for the detection of persons and anomalies. The sensor equipment is designed for standard perimeters.

Quarero structures sensors into three clearly delineated tiers:

• QR-1: RGB plus audio for interior areas and light outdoor deployments, 3,200 euros per month.
• QR-2: adds thermal imaging and person detection at night and in fog, 3,500 euros per month. Details at QR-2 with thermal imaging.
• QR-3: integrates LiDAR and active drone detection, 3,800 euros per month. Specification at QR-3 with LiDAR and drone detection.

Drone detection is not listed as a standard module by Ascento according to publicly available product communication. For KRITIS sectors with documented airspace risk (substations, water utilities, hazardous-material storage), QR-3 is currently the only tier in this comparison that covers this detection in the standard configuration.

Business Model: RaaS, CapEx, and Contract Term

Quarero does not sell hardware. Operations run fully as a Robotics-as-a-Service model with monthly OpEx booking. The minimum term is 24 months. Delivery follows within 48 hours of contract signing.

Ascento operates by public account also via a subscription model, but with individual pricing per project. That is legitimate and common in robotics, but it complicates direct cost comparison before the first bid round.

Quarero communicates prices publicly in three tiers and thus verifiably. This transparency is itself a decision factor. Security leads who must calculate an internal budget in advance can model Quarero without an RFP.

Balance-sheet impact in both cases: no capitalization as fixed assets, no depreciation over five to seven years, no residual-value risk on technology change. Budget approval in most houses therefore proceeds without an investment committee.

KRITIS Suitability and Regulatory Fit

The KRITIS-Dachgesetz (KRITIS Umbrella Act, Bundestag-Drucksache 20/9262) obliges operators to demonstrate physical protection measures, including perimeter protection and detection of unauthorized access. In parallel, the NIS-2 Directive establishes board responsibility for the resilience of essential entities. Sector assignment and thresholds derive from the BSI-KritisV.

Quarero emerged in an environment whose co-founders are co-authors of the KRITIS-Dachgesetz operator handbook. QR-3 covers the energy, water, health, and transport sectors with documented patrol protocols that withstand audit requirements. Practical preparation is offered by the KRITIS-Dachgesetz checklist.

Ascento has not addressed KRITIS as a primary segment in public communication to date. That does not rule out KRITIS suitability, but it shifts the burden of proof into the bid phase. Audit suitability of logs is not an option in the KRITIS context but an obligation. Signed patrol logs with time stamp, GPS trace, and sensor event must be presentable at any time without subsequent reprocessing.

TCO: Robots Versus Classic Guard Service

A 24/7 guard post costs between 15,000 and 25,000 euros per month according to BDSW structural data, depending on tariff area and qualification. This includes shift premiums, night and holiday premiums, and ancillary wage costs. A complete comparison calculation is available at TCO versus classic guard service.

QR-2 replaces the night post at 3,500 euros per month. Sickness, vacation, training days, and turnover are eliminated. The difference covers the control-room link in most configurations as well.

The workable model is hybrid. Day duty by certified personnel under §34a, night duty by QR-2 or QR-3 with escalation to the control room. The documented saving in this configuration lies at 40 to 60 percent versus the full-shift model [source required]. A sound comparison calculation against Ascento requires an individual quote. This asymmetry in pricing transparency is an operational factor in budget discussions with the finance department.

Integration, Control Room, and Operation

Quarero delivers with 24/7 control-room link and a defined escalation path. Anomalies are verified at the first level by the control room and handed over to the responsible police station at the second level. Incident reports are archived as signed logs for KRITIS evidence.

Ascento offers its own operator platform with live stream and alarm routing. Interfaces to existing PSIM or VMS landscapes (Genetec, Milestone, Qognify) are available from both vendors. Anyone operating a control-room infrastructure must plan an integration phase in both cases.

Commissioning time Quarero: 48 hours from contract to the first productive patrol run. The training effort for the security team lies below four hours [source required], since the operating logic is designed for a single dispatcher. Ascento commissioning times are not communicated publicly in a standardized form.

Decision Matrix for the Security Lead

The selection can be reduced to a few operational questions:

• Terrain with stairs, curbs, and no ramp budget: evaluate Ascento. The bipedal architecture solves a problem here that four-wheeled platforms do not address.
• Industrial perimeter with defined paths and KRITIS obligation: QR-2 or QR-3 from Quarero. Normal plant roads are sufficient for a four-wheeled base, and audit capability of the logs is prepared.
• Documented drone risk in airspace: QR-3 is set. LiDAR and drone detection in the standard configuration close the KRITIS requirement without an add-on module.
• Procurement without CapEx, with fixed price and without investment committee: Quarero RaaS. The three-tier public price list is calculable without an RFP.
• Pilot window under 60 days: Quarero. Delivery in 48 hours, minimum term 24 months, exit through regular contract run.

The recommendation for uncertain configurations: side-by-side pilot over 30 days with documented KPIs. Defined metrics are: patrol coverage as a percentage of the target route, mean detection time per simulated incident, false-positive rate per 24 hours, and availability. Anyone who runs both platforms against each other under real conditions has a sound decision basis after four weeks. Background on pilot design in practice is available in the article on hybrid perimeter protection in the industrial park.

Quarero is not the right choice in every configuration. On tight historical plant sites with many level changes, the advantage lies with Ascento. On typical industrial and KRITIS perimeters with drone risk, OpEx requirement, and audit obligation, the advantage lies with Quarero. This applies in particular to QR-3. Both platforms are serious. The question is not which vendor is better but which fits the terrain, the regulatory obligation, and the balance-sheet logic.

To draft a comparison specification with both platforms, the 30-day side-by-side can be initiated directly. Configure 30-day side-by-side pilot is the next step, with defined scope, documented KPIs, and a clear exit point at the end of the pilot.