Compare Dyson 360 Vis Nav Robot Vacuum vs Shark PowerDetect UV Reveal Robot Vacuum

Accessories include cleaning solution, side brushes, and spare brush rollers, giving buyers the core consumables and attachments needed to start.

Adaptive lift is strongly supported across reviews as the robot raises itself over thresholds, obstacles, or uneven surfaces.

Design and finish are widely described as stylish and distinctive (polarizing colorway), with a premium look that clearly reads as Dyson.

Design reactions are mixed, ranging from typical 2-in-1 robot styling to a stylish white finish with champagne accents.

Smart/app features cover scheduling, room selection, and no-go zones with a dust/heat map, but the ecosystem is less feature-rich than other flagship robovacs.

Smart features are extensive, including AI navigation, app control, assistants, scheduling, and stain detection, but app depth and customization are recurring caveats.

A few users note the rear airflow can blow light pet hair aside during turns, though it usually still gets picked up on subsequent passes if coverage reaches the area.

Airflow blowback is mixed: it can dislodge corner debris, but reviewers also observed it pushing debris the wrong way.

Area rug handling is supported by one positive review that found the living room rug well vacuumed and refreshed.

Setup is typically described as fast and straightforward, with minimal assembly and a guided app pairing process.

Setup is generally manageable, with easy assembly and app-guided mapping, though one review said the full setup and mapping took about an hour.

Bag-full indication is a weakness because one review says the base does not alert when the debris bin is full.

Runtime is adequate on quieter/default modes but drops sharply in Boost/Max; recharge-and-resume helps finish larger homes at the cost of longer total cleaning time.

Battery and charging are mostly strong, with three-hour claims and auto-return top-ups, offset by one critique of the battery size.

The onboard bin is described as larger than typical and easy to remove; capacity helps offset the lack of a self-empty dock, but it can fill quickly in heavy-shed homes.

The bagless dock and debris storage are a major strength, with several reviews emphasizing self-emptying and up-to-60-day debris capacity.

Build feels solid and premium in most reviews, though the robot’s size/weight and occasional scuffs from bumps are mentioned.

Build quality has one strong negative data point from a critical review that called the mop pad plastic janky.

High-pile or deeply embedded carpet performance is above average and sometimes impressive, but a few tests show it not as dominant as the raw power suggests.

High-pile or thicker carpet is a weakness, especially for kitty litter, hair, and oatmeal flakes.

Low-pile carpet pickup is frequently rated excellent, with strong surface pickup and good hair removal.

Low-pile carpet and rugs were described as cleaner, fluffier, or totally clean.

Medium-pile carpet pickup is a major strength, often described as closer to a full-size vacuum than typical robovacs.

Medium carpet evidence is positive, with rugs or carpets described as refreshed or totally clean.

Clogging is uncommon but can occur when the bin/airway is packed full; the robot can notify you to clear the blockage.

Comparative evidence appears mainly in broader mopping-market context rather than direct lab superiority across every category.

On-device screen and the app are generally easy to use for starting runs and choosing modes; advanced controls (like multi-pass options) feel limited versus premium competitors.

Controls are mixed: physical buttons help, but several reviewers criticized app navigation, dated controls, or missing advanced options.

Cord length is a weakness in one review because the dock’s short cable limits placement.

Corners are a mixed bag: the D-shape helps approach, but several tests note the robot can bump or take wide turns and still leave corner debris behind.

Corner cleaning is mixed: one review praised the corner reach and air assist, while one critic preferred an extending brush.

Crevice and groove pickup is repeatedly praised as best-in-class, pulling debris out of cracks on hard floors quickly even on lower modes.

The top-mounted navigation light/display aids operation and can help in darker areas, but some reviews still report navigation struggles under beds or in low-light zones.

Debris and stain illumination are central strengths, with UV and visible lighting repeatedly described as revealing hidden messes.

Docking reliability is usually acceptable but not flawless; some reviewers report occasional difficulty finding the dock, especially after mapping issues or in dark zones.

Docking and auto-empty reliability are strong overall, with repeated returns to base, dustbin emptying, mop washing, and refill support.

Dock noise is mixed-negative: auto-emptying and water cleaning are loud, while drying is less disruptive.

Dried-on stain cleaning is the strongest consensus area, with reviews repeatedly describing UV detection, targeted scrubbing, and successful stain removal.

Ease of use is generally positive through room selection, setup, and visible cleaning status, but app navigation limits reduce confidence.

Edge and baseboard cleaning is a differentiator thanks to the side duct/actuator approach; it often performs at least as well as side brushes, but recessed edges can still be missed.

Edge and baseboard cleaning is mixed-positive: reviewers liked wall and cabinet attention, but one critic said the edge system was not as effective as an extending brush.

Edge-following is solid along straight walls, but multiple reviews mention occasional path offsets or wide turns that reduce precision in tight areas.

Edge-following evidence is limited but positive, with one review describing perimeter movement around the room.

Emptying is generally viewed as hygienic and straightforward (drop-bottom style), though manual emptying is still a routine task and can create some dust if done carelessly.

Emptying and mess control is mixed-negative due to an overfilled onboard dustbin example and a leakage report.

Only one critical review discusses energy use, framing the scrubbing process as energy intensive.

Filtration is repeatedly highlighted as a strong point (HEPA-style capture and reduced dust blowback during use), with washable or long-life filter elements mentioned.

Filtration and dust containment are consistently described positively through HEPA or anti-allergen sealed bagless-base claims.

Floor drying is a weakness in the evidence, with wet floors and a roughly 30-minute dry time mentioned.

Floorhead design is mixed, with praise for the wide flat mop pad but criticism that it may not apply much pressure.

Floor shine has limited but positive evidence from one review saying the mopping left floors sparkling.

Hair pickup on carpets is strong, including lifting tangled pet and human hair from fibers, especially in Auto/Boost.

Carpet hair pickup is mixed: one lab-style review reported excellent pet-hair pickup, while others saw leftover cat hair or weaker thick-carpet hair pickup.

Hair pickup on hard floors is strong overall; one tester notes occasional fur being blown aside while turning due to airflow.

Hard-floor hair pickup has one positive lab-style data point with high pet-hair pickup on linoleum.

Tangle resistance is commonly reported as better than average, with long hair less likely to wrap heavily, though some users still see buildup over multiple cycles.

Tangle resistance has limited positive support from the flat mop pad being described as less prone to tangling.

Fine dust pickup on hard floors is strong when coverage is complete; a few reviewers note misses mainly come from navigation/coverage gaps rather than weak pickup.

Hard-floor fine-debris pickup is strong in tests with kitty litter, pet hair, and oatmeal-type dry messes.

Large debris intake on hard floors is generally excellent (rice, cereal, litter), with occasional edge/corner leftovers depending on pathing and approach angle.

Hard-floor large-debris intake is strong in Cheerio and dry-debris examples.

LED and light feedback are a strength, with multiple reviews describing colored status lights and UV visibility.

The heating system is generally a dock strength through hot-water washing and hot-air drying, but one critic said the pad did not really dry.

Reviewers consistently frame UV stain detection and targeted cleaning as an innovative differentiator among premium robot vacuums.

Large-debris handling is generally good in Cheerio and oatmeal examples, though capacity limits appeared in one lab-style test setup.

Low-profile design is supported by one review that successfully vacuumed under a large storage bed.

Maintenance is manageable (washable/accessible parts) but can be more frequent in pet homes; some reviewers point to filter replacement cost as an ongoing consideration.

Maintenance is moderate: filters and parts need periodic cleaning, though reviewers do not describe the process as unusually hard.

Maneuverability is positive in hands-on tests, with reviewers describing good navigation and autonomous dirt/stain response.

Navigation and path efficiency are the most common complaints: coverage can be inefficient (spirals/loops), it may pause to reorient, and dark/under-bed areas can trigger getting lost.

Mapping and pathing are mixed: zigzag routes and quick maps impressed, while one-floor mapping and customization limits frustrated reviewers.

The mop lifting and detach system is a major strength, with multiple reviews praising automatic detaching, reattaching, and carpet avoidance.

Mopping performance is broadly praised for stain-focused scrubbing and clean floors, but one critical review says pressure and water control are weak.

Noise is moderate on quieter modes but can be loud on Boost/Max; several reviewers mention the classic high-RPM Dyson sound.

Noise is a repeated weakness: reviewers called auto-emptying, water cleaning, and the motors loud, even when drying was described as a low hum.

Obstacle avoidance is inconsistent: it avoids larger objects reasonably well but may run over small/low items (cables, small toys) and is not trusted for pet accidents.

Obstacle avoidance is generally strong with cables, socks, shoes, and floor-type obstacles, though not perfect in every scenario.

Odor control is supported by deodorizer features and heat drying that reviewers associate with reducing smells or mildew.

Ongoing costs are mainly filters and parts since there are no disposable dust bags; some reviewers consider Dyson filter pricing a drawback.

Ongoing costs are a clear strength because the dock is bagless and avoids recurring dust-bag purchases.

Overall cleaning convenience is a strength, with reviewers emphasizing seamless modes, hands-free dock features, and autonomous cleaning.

One critical review raises a durability concern by describing the mop-related plastic as flimsy.

Overall opinion trends positive across hands-on reviews, though the broader evidence includes one sharply negative value-focused review.

For pet homes, reviews highlight strong fur pickup and reduced tangling; the main limitation is inconsistent small-obstacle avoidance (toys/cables).

Pet evidence centers on dog hair, cat-litter areas, and pet-accident stain detection, making the robot especially relevant for pet households.

Value is the biggest sticking point: reviewers frequently say the vacuuming performance is elite, but the lack of self-emptying and mopping (plus uneven navigation) makes the premium price hard to justify for most buyers.

Price is divisive; some reviewers felt the feature set justified the premium, while others called the $1,300 class price hard to accept.

Privacy gets a positive nod in at least one review, noting camera images are handled in a privacy-conscious way during operation.

Privacy controls are a strength in the available evidence because image processing is described as local and on-device.

Runtime is mostly strong at about three hours, but one critical review objects to the battery capacity versus newer flagships.

Sanitizing evidence is mixed: the dock uses hot water or certified sanitization, but one review notes UV itself is not a sanitizing pass.

The self-cleaning dock is a consistent strength, with mop washing, drying, self-emptying, and sanitizing mentioned repeatedly.

Software updates are repeatedly cited as meaningful, with some reviewers reporting navigation and mapping improvements after firmware updates.

Feature longevity is supported only by one review citing on-device AI and processing as more future-proof than some competitors.

The liquid system has one negative report of excess saturation spreading dirtiness.

Storage is mixed: the dock needs clearance and space, though one reviewer found the overall setup visually unobtrusive.

Residue is mixed: one review reports no residue after sticky messes, while another found coffee remaining.

Stuck resistance is average: big wheels help with thresholds, but cables, clutter, and tight/dark under-furniture areas can still cause hang-ups without no-go zones.

Stuck resistance is mostly strong through NeverStuck and no-rescue reports, offset by one jammed-threshold example.

Reviews consistently describe class-leading suction and airflow, with standout deep pickup especially on carpet; the main caveat is that max/boost performance can shorten runtime and extend total job time via recharge-and-resume.

Multiple reviews describe strong suction, Dirt Detect boosts, or adaptive suction, with no broad suction complaint outside related airflow tradeoffs.

Heavy-duty suitability is limited because reviewers still framed it as daily upkeep and one critic called the scrubbing energy-intensive.

Small-space suitability is mixed: it suits mostly hard-floor layouts, but dock clearance and small-room mapping caused friction.

Support impressions are mixed: some expect premium service, while at least one reviewer mentions slow response times; reliability concerns are tied more to software/navigation than hardware failures.

Reliability concerns focus on app mapping friction, occasional navigation issues, and one critical report of recurring errors.

Surface safety is mostly good because the mop detaches or lifts to avoid carpet, though one critical review still observed leakage concerns.

Tool changes are simple in the setup footage, with the brush roller pressing and locking into place without a complicated procedure.

Under-furniture pickup can be very good when clearance allows, but dark/low areas (like under beds) are a known navigation weak spot for some testers.

Under-furniture pickup is positive, with evidence under a storage bed and around a narrow coffee table.

Value-for-money is supported only by one highly negative review that rejected the product at its price.

Versatility is supported by the ability to vacuum, mop, or combine both modes.

Water-tank feedback is mostly positive for capacity and usability, but one critical review says the dirty-water tank is smaller.

Weight is often noted as on the heavy side for a robovac, which may contribute to energy use and how it behaves on obstacles.

Weight is only directly supported by one review listing the docked setup at 26.9 pounds.