36Kr Publishes Article Asking Which Humanoid Company Will Follow Unitree

On August 14, 2026, 36Kr published an article asking which humanoid robot company would follow Unitree.

The comparison of “the next Unitree” uses a single company as a benchmark for evaluating those that follow. But a company’s name recognition or visibility alone cannot measure technological progress, ongoing product supply and actual use on the same basis. The title of the article indicates only how it frames the question; the information provided here does not identify candidate companies, evaluation criteria or supporting data. Readers should consult the original source for details. Our later report, Unitree founder sees robot breakthrough around 2028, Bloomberg reports (October 23, 2026), relayed the founder’s outlook for the future. This is a view on when technological progress may occur and should be distinguished from evidence of current production capacity or deployment. Our report that daily robot rental rates are falling (October 23, 2026) covered rental rates for the U2. Pricing can offer a clue to the cost of use, but without information on utilization rates, terms of availability and the range of users, it is not possible to assess the extent of commercial adoption or profitability. Both reports were published after the primary source, so they should not be treated as evidence on which the August 14 article was based. The focus of comparison should be not on ranking company names, but on what can be verified about robot performance and supply, operation in real-world environments, and data gathered through use. Our report, Researchers create robot-learning dataset recording human activity (October 24, 2026), covered data collection combining video and bodily movements, but noted that the effects on learning and performance in real-world environments could not be confirmed. This example also shows that the existence of data and proof of a product’s capabilities are separate issues. Positioning a particular company as “the next” will require information on performance and operations that can be compared under the same conditions. Points to watch include, first, whether the companies being compared and the evaluation criteria are clearly stated; second, whether concrete information on mass production or ongoing supply is available; and third, whether operational track records in real-world environments and supporting data can be verified.