Forbes reports on an evaluation of robot work volume involving AgiBot

Forbes reported on Oct. 30, 2026, on an evaluation of robot work volume involving AgiBot.

What can be confirmed this time is that Forbes reported on an evaluation of robot work volume involving AgiBot. The excerpts provided do not include the article itself, so its basis, explanation of the evaluation method and statements from AgiBot cannot be verified. It therefore cannot be read as evidence that the company formally adopted the metric or brought about a change in industry standards. See the original article for details. For context on the evaluation, see AGIBOT proposes “Worken,” a metric for measuring the actual work performed by robots. According to that article, Worken is a framework that multiplies the number of robots in operation, autonomous operating hours and an output efficiency ratio. AGIBOT described it as still under development and said it planned to establish task-specific benchmarks based on deployment and operational data. Under this framework, evaluations would consider not only shipments or one-off demonstrations, but also operating hours and output efficiency for particular tasks. However, proposing a formula is a separate step from conducting measurements under the same conditions at multiple sites and making the results comparable. This distinction is important to avoid conflating business metrics for robots with the work they perform in real-world environments. Related coverage by this newspaper has also noted that revenue and shipment trends should be evaluated on a different basis from real-world operation. Because Worken remains at the proposal stage, its name and formula alone do not show which tasks AgiBot’s robots have performed or how consistently. Establishing task-specific benchmarks also raises questions about how to define an operating robot, how to account for autonomous operating hours and how to define the output efficiency ratio. The materials provided, however, do not confirm specific definitions or measurement results. What remains to be seen is whether the metric’s definition will be published, whether reproducible measurements across different tasks and operating environments will be presented, and how deployment and operational data will be incorporated into benchmarks. The reporting available at this point does not provide enough information to assess progress or results.