Home backup · US 120 V
Best power station for a freezer
Ranked by a calculation, not an opinion. All twelve start a chest freezer, so this page turns on gate two: the real question is measured in days, and nothing here is proven to reach two.
Our pick
Yes, it runs it 45 h see why below ↓
Short of the 48 h target
from a published usable capacity, with the machine’s own 10 W idle draw in the denominator
Derived from official coefficients + Derived by WattPairverified 2026-08-0112 US records method
The bar under usable energy: this set draws 77% of it over 48 h.
BLUETTI Elite 200 V2 — the longest anything here can be SHOWN to last on this set, 45 h — short of the 48 h this page ranks against, and stated rather than rounded up. Larger records exist; we have found no usable capacity published for them, so a duration for them would be a guess. $899, price checked 2026-08-17.
Usable energy · Derived from official coefficients · verified 2026-08-01
This set, 48 h · draw × duty cycle × hours
The buy link is in the bar at the bottom of the screen — one action per page, and it goes to the merchant we last checked this price at.
Every row opens the calculator, pre-filled, each figure below sourced — re-run any number yourself.
How this list is ordered
Four gates, in this order: does it run the set, can we prove how long, can it be bought today, then price. No score and no weighting.
The four gates in full
Applied in this order to every published US record. There is no score and no weighting — each gate either separates two machines or hands them to the next one.
-
1 Does it run the set?
Every record is put through the compatibility engine against all of the loads at once — running watts against continuous output, the worst start-up instant against the surge ceiling, waveform where a load demands one. Green first, then the tight fits, then anything the engine could not read, then the machines that cannot do it. A machine that cannot start the load in front of it is not a cheaper option.
-
2 Can we prove how long?
A runtime is only printed where the brand publishes what it takes to compute one — a usable-capacity coefficient, whether stated as depth of discharge and inverter efficiency or as one combined figure — and never from the number on the box. Records that reach the target sort first, records with a proven but shorter figure next (longest first: inside that band none of them does the job, so the one that gets closest wins), and records whose duration cannot be proven at all sort last inside their verdict band. That is a statement about published data, not about the hardware, and each of those rows says so.
-
3 Can it be bought today?
A record under a verified out-of-stock policy, or one we may not sell into your state, sorts behind an equivalent one that can be bought. It stays on the list with the reason attached rather than disappearing. Whether WattPair happens to hold a purchase link for a record is not part of this gate and never moves it: a machine we cannot link to is ranked exactly as if we could, and simply carries no buy button.
-
4 Then price.
Cheapest first, inside everything above. One mains standard and one currency per page, so every comparison is like for like. A record with no verified price sorts to the back of its own band — the absence of a price is not a low price.
The loads this ranks against
Why this set, and where its figures come from
One 7 cu ft chest freezer, on its own, at 30 W while its compressor is running. That figure is derived rather than read off a plate, and the derivation is worth knowing because it is where this kind of number usually goes wrong: the FTC EnergyGuide label gives 225 kWh a year, which is 25.7 W averaged over every hour of the year — INCLUDING the hours the compressor is off. Dividing that annual average by the 85% duty cycle recovers the 30 W the compressor actually draws when it runs. This record held the annual average in the running-watts field until it was corrected; the duty cycle was then being applied twice and every runtime on it came out about a tenth too long. The correction is on the record with its date. The 85% itself is borrowed — we have found no published duty cycle for a chest freezer, so this library uses the figure one refrigerator maker states for refrigerators, which is conservative here: a chest freezer is opened less and insulated better.
- Running
- 30 W
- Start-up
- 156 W
- Duty cycle
- 85%
Derived from official coefficients · verified 2026-08-01 · low confidence · start-up basis: Category envelope
- Running together
- 30 W
- Worst start-up instant
- 156 W
- Average draw
- 26 W
- Energy for 48 h
- 1,224 Wh
Why 48 hours
Forty-eight hours, and this is the only page on this site that ranks against two days. Every other load here is an overnight question; a freezer is a food-safety question, and food safety is counted in days. The consequence is that the whole list lands in the “proven but short” band, which is where the ranking’s tie-break becomes visible: inside that band none of these machines does the job, so the one that gets closest wins, not the cheapest one. The start-up figure is a category estimate rather than this freezer’s own — we have found no published locked-rotor rating for a chest freezer — and the caveat under the load table says where the estimate comes from. It never binds here in any case: 156 W is inside every ceiling on the page.
Derived by WattPairverified 2026-08-01appliance records method
The start-up figure that decides this set is a category envelope
We have found no published inrush figure for this class. The multiple this site uses is therefore a category envelope drawn from standards tables: deliberately conservative, and not a measurement of any particular unit. A verdict held back by it may well be fine in practice — we will not say so until a manufacturer does. It is also 156 W of the 156 W start-up total above, so the start-up check on this whole page turns on it.
Applies to: Chest freezer
All 12 US records, ranked
12 of the 12 US records we publish run this set, 7 publish enough for a runtime to be proven, and 9 can be bought today. The percentage is the set as a share of that machine's continuous output; past 82% a verdict drops out of the green.
- 1 BLUETTI Elite 200 V2 BLUETTI · US 120 V 2,600 W continuous 2,073.6 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.2%
- 2 Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus Jackery · US 120 V 3,000 W continuous · 6,000 W surge ceiling 2,042.8 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.0%
- 3 BLUETTI Elite 100 V2 BLUETTI · US 120 V 1,800 W continuous · 3,600 W surge ceiling 1,024 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.7%
- 4 Jackery Explorer 1000 Plus Jackery · US 120 V 2,000 W continuous · 4,000 W surge ceiling 1,264.6 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.5%
- 5 Jackery Explorer 1000 v2 Jackery · US 120 V 1,500 W continuous · 3,000 W surge ceiling 1,070 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it2.0%
- 6 BLUETTI Elite 30 V2 BLUETTI · US 120 V 600 W continuous 288 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it5.0%
- 7 Jackery Explorer 300 Plus Jackery · US 120 V 300 W continuous · 600 W surge ceiling 288 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it10%
- 8 EcoFlow RIVER 3 Plus EcoFlow · US 120 V 600 W continuous · 1,200 W surge ceiling 286 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it5.0%
-
Photo shows the EU 230V version — page specs are US 120V. 9 EcoFlow DELTA 3 Plus EcoFlow · US 120 V 1,800 W continuous · 3,600 W surge ceiling 1,024 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.7% - 10 EcoFlow DELTA 2 Max EcoFlow · US 120 V 2,400 W continuous · 4,800 W surge ceiling 2,048 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it1.3%
- 11 EcoFlow DELTA Pro 3 EcoFlow · US 120 V 4,000 W continuous · 8,000 W surge ceiling 4,096 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it0.8%
- 12 EcoFlow STREAM Ultra EcoFlow · US 120 V 800 W continuous 1,920 Wh nameplate · Official spec · verified 2026-08-01 Runs it3.8%
Why 5 records rank below machines they out-spec
5 of the 12 records here start and hold this load set and still rank below machines they out-spec, for one reason: we have found no depth of discharge and no inverter efficiency published by EcoFlow for them, so the hours a reader actually wants cannot be computed from anything but the number on the box — and dividing a nameplate by a load is the one thing this site will not do. The other side of that is BLUETTI and Jackery: they are the only brands here that publish both, which is the whole reason every proven runtime above belongs to them. The rule rewarded disclosure, not hardware.
What their rows do carry is the bound: that record’s nameplate over this set’s average draw of 26 W, which is arithmetic anyone can redo against the summary above — floored, never rounded up, so the printed ceiling never claims an hour more than the number supports — and it is printed on every one of those rows. But it is a ceiling and not a duration: it assumes the pack surrenders every watt-hour printed on it and that the inverter loses nothing turning DC into AC, and no battery does either. The real hours sit somewhere below that ceiling, and the two missing figures are exactly what would say how far below. That is the difference between a number this page will print and a number it will not.
The scope of that finding, stated: as of 2026-08-08 we read each manufacturer’s own published documents for these 5 models and found no depth-of-discharge and no inverter-efficiency figure in them. It is a statement about what those documents contained on that date — not a claim that the number exists nowhere. Send us one that is published and the record moves, and the row moves with it. This is a statement about published data, not about the hardware — the verdict column judges that separately, and it comes first.
The load that changes the answer
Add a full-size refrigerator to the same set and the first gate is still a formality: 12 of the 12 still clear it outright, against 12 on the set above. The reason is one instant: a full-size refrigerator asks for 286 W at start-up on its own — 5.2× its own running draw, against 156 W for everything on the list above put together. That start-up figure is a category envelope: we have found no published start-up rating for this unit itself. And it costs more than it looks: the kitchen refrigerator draws more on average than the freezer does, so adding it does not lengthen this page’s answer, it roughly divides it. Nothing gets refused; every proven figure above simply gets shorter. The quiz carries this set as a preset.
start-up figure: Derived from official coefficients · verified 2026-08-01 · low confidence
The other rankings
Where to go next
Questions people ask about this list
Do all 12 of them really run it?
Pricing, ranking and how the site is funded are not questions about this list — they are the same on every page here, and they are set out in full in the price policy and how the money works.