Compare Dyson Ball Animal 2 Upright Vacuum Cleaner vs Kenmore Featherlite Lift-Up Vacuum

Reviewers consistently liked the included tools and attachments, especially when they made hair, upholstery, and detailed cleaning easier.

Reviewers considered the included accessories decent to nice, especially the upholstery and combination tools, without calling them premium.

The self-adjusting head earned praise for adapting across floors, but multiple tests found that the same tight seal could hinder large debris or rugs.

The lift-up chassis/canister function was praised for making stair-type cleaning easier.

Reviewers who commented on looks described the Dyson as cool, futuristic, or one-of-a-kind, with no major finish complaints in the evidence.

Area-rug results were mixed: one owner cleaned small rugs quickly with tools, while testers found strong suction could make rugs unworkable or sticky.

Assembly evidence was positive, with reviewers describing a simple setup and parts that clicked together easily.

Assembly was consistently described as easy or straightforward across reviews.

One reviewer liked that the rollers stop in the upright position, framing it as a useful safety behavior around children.

The bagless bin was praised for large capacity and reduced interruptions, though most comments focused on capacity and disposal rather than aesthetics.

The bagless dust bin was praised because the container is easy to dump and reuse.

Build quality evidence was mixed-positive: some reviewers called the plastics robust and durable, while one disliked a cheap-feeling hose handle.

Build quality was mostly praised as solid, durable, or well-made, with the main caveat being limited long-term evidence.

High-pile carpet was the clearest cleaning limitation, especially with cereal, rugs, shag, or strong suction pulling the head down.

Low-pile and general carpet pickup drew strong praise, with several reviewers reporting excellent or near-record cleaning results.

Medium or thicker-carpet suitability was supported by reviewers who described the wider brush bar and flooring range as appropriate for thicker or medium pile.

Medium-pile carpet evidence was generally strong, including perfect or high sand/deep-clean results, while TechGearLab rated carpet only slightly above average.

Clogging evidence was limited but negative, with reviewers noting occasional dog-hair bin sticking and a narrow tube that could clog on larger items.

Dustbin and open-design comments were positive about keeping the vacuum free from clogs.

Comparative performance was strong overall, but not unanimous: some reviews ranked it among the best, while others found cheaper models performed better.

Comparative evidence was split but mostly favorable: several reviews put Kenmore ahead of budget rivals, while TechGearLab preferred Shark alternatives.

Controls were viewed favorably when mentioned, especially suction settings and brush controls that let users adjust spinning or suction behavior.

The roller-off control was praised as handy for hard floors because suction continues without the brushroll spinning.

Handheld conversion was a weakness because a reviewer noted it cannot become a lightweight handheld unit like some alternatives.

Lift-up or detachable-canister use was usually praised for portability and above-floor cleaning, though one lab review criticized the lack of a true lift-away feature.

Cord reach was consistently positive where mentioned, with reviewers appreciating the long cord or cable for larger cleaning areas.

Cord length was adequate to good: some reviews called it plenty or long enough, while Vacuum Wars treated 25 feet as neutral.

The cord hook was praised because it kept the cord from tangling around the user's feet.

Crevice and groove pickup was split: one test praised deep crevice pickup, while hard-floor gap and larger-debris tests exposed limitations.

Crevice and groove pickup was a repeated weakness, with Project Farm and Vacuum Wars describing below-average or struggling results.

Cyclone performance was praised as central to the vacuum’s suction and constant cleaning power.

Debris illumination was praised for helping users see under furniture, in dark areas, or during everyday cleaning.

Ease of use was generally positive, especially for routine movement and cleaning tasks, though weight-related handling complaints appear under other attributes.

Ease of use was a major positive in most reviews thanks to light handling and ergonomics, but TechGearLab scored ease of use below average.

Edge and baseboard cleaning was praised in test evidence, including near-edge debris collection and edge-to-edge cleaner-head design.

Project Farm rated the Kenmore as the best in its test for cleaning close to a wall.

Emptying and mess control were consistently praised, with several reviewers saying the bin empties easily and keeps hands away from debris.

Emptying and mess control were consistently praised as easy, with reviewers noting simple dumping and cleaning.

Filtration and containment were strong overall thanks to HEPA or washable filtration, though one lab noted a partly weakened seal on an older unit.

The sealed HEPA filtration drew strong praise for trapping dust inside the vacuum rather than releasing it back into the room.

Floorhead design was a tradeoff: reviewers liked the wide, self-adjusting head, but some found it poor with larger debris.

The floorhead design was praised for efficiency and a balanced gate-size tradeoff between large-debris pickup and sealing.

Floorhead sealing was mixed-positive, with suction-loss control praised but active-baseplate behavior linked to large-debris problems.

Reviews praised the hard-floor seal, especially the fabric squeegee that helped reduce scattering with the brushroll on.

Hair pickup on carpets and pet hair tests was a major strength across lab and owner reviews.

Carpet pet-hair pickup was praised in both a lab review and a pet-household owner review.

Hard-floor hair pickup was praised, particularly when the brushroll stayed on without scattering debris.

Hair-wrap evidence was mixed: pet-hair tools resisted tangling, but one lab measured substantial long-hair wrap on the brush roll.

Hair-wrap resistance was the most repeated drawback, with several reviewers reporting long hair wrapping around the brushroll, though one reviewer claimed strong anti-tangle behavior.

Hard-floor fine-dust pickup was strong in some tests but weaker in floor cracks and gaps.

Hard-floor large-debris intake was mixed, ranging from strong cereal pickup to complaints that the head pushed larger debris.

Hard-floor large-debris pickup was often praised, including perfect rice pickup and better large-debris handling, though TechGearLab reported cereal plowing.

The lack of LEDs on the floorhead was a clear drawback in the only opinionated evidence for this attribute.

LED/headlight comments were positive, with reviewers calling the lighting useful and appreciated.

Hose and wand reach were praised for stairs and above-floor cleaning, though one owner disliked a stiff non-bending section.

TechGearLab listed hose length as a drawback.

Innovation evidence centered on Dyson’s ball and self-adjusting systems, which reviewers called distinctive or inventive, but sometimes with practical tradeoffs.

Vacuum Wars praised the Kenmore for bringing premium-style upright features into a budget price range.

Kid-friendliness evidence was positive, with one household reporting children enjoyed using the tools and another praising upright roller safety.

Low-profile cleaning was a repeated weakness because the ball and bulk limited reach under furniture and tight areas.

Maintenance was considered straightforward, especially because filters can be washed and routine cleaning tasks are easy to access.

Maintenance evidence was positive where reviewers discussed easy filter changes and simple cleaning.

Maneuverability was polarizing: the ball design helped turning, but weight and suction made some users work harder.

Handling was a clear strength, with reviewers praising the light feel, swivel, low effort, and easy maneuvering around furniture.

Noise opinions varied sharply, from quiet and acceptable in some reviews to loud or noisy in others.

Noise evidence was mixed: one comparison called it relatively quiet, while another review found it a little louder than average.

Onboard tool storage was praised when mentioned, especially the integrated storage for upright accessories.

Onboard tool storage was presented as useful because accessories stay on the upright for quick access.

Ongoing ownership costs were favorable because the vacuum is bagless and uses washable or reusable filters.

Reviewers liked the bagless and washable-filter setup because it reduced the need to buy bags or replacement filters frequently.

Durability and longevity evidence was positive, with reviewers citing long-term use, flagship status, or confidence from warranty/build quality.

Build impressions were positive, but long-term durability remained only cautiously assessed because the model was relatively new.

Overall opinion was mixed-to-positive: many reviewers loved the cleaning power, but some rejected it over price, weight, or handling.

Overall opinion leaned positive across most reviews, but TechGearLab offered a notably more negative verdict.

Packaging was praised by one reviewer as neat, intact, and well protected.

Pet-ready performance was a strong point, with pet hair and upholstery hair pickup repeatedly praised, though one turbine-tool comment was critical.

The pet-focused review praised the vacuum for a pet-friendly home, tying that to pet hair pickup and dust containment.

Value was the main split: some reviewers said the power justified the price, while others called it too expensive or best only on sale.

Most reviewers framed the Kenmore as a strong budget value, though TechGearLab argued similarly priced models performed better.

Reverse-pass cleaning was strong in Project Farm’s plastic-ball test, where the Kenmore picked up remaining debris on the return pass.

One reviewer valued the hard-floor mode because stopping the brushroll helps avoid scratching wood floors.

Stair cleaning was generally strong because of long hose and wand reach, though one review cited moving the heavy unit as cumbersome.

The lift-up layout was praised for stair cleaning because it made carrying and using the vacuum easier.

Upright-stand stability and storage were weak spots, with multiple reviewers describing bulk or difficulty getting the vacuum to stay upright.

Stuck resistance evidence was negative, focused on area rugs and mats that strong suction could grab or lift.

Suction was the strongest consensus attribute, repeatedly praised as exceptional, powerful, or among the strongest tested.

Most reviews described suction or airflow as strong, with test evidence ranging from solid water-lift results to owner praise for high suction.

Heavy-duty suitability was mixed: reviewers admired its power for busy homes, but some found it impractical for varied carpets or prolonged whole-house use.

Small-space suitability was poor because the large ball and bulky body made tight spaces and storage harder.

Small-space usefulness was supported by comments about a narrower head and attachments for tight spaces.

Support and reliability evidence was positive, driven by the five-year warranty and reviewer confidence in coverage.

One owner-style review recommended it for someone wanting a cleaner home and something reliable.

Surface-safety evidence was positive where mentioned, especially the ability to stop the brush bar on hard floors or delicate rugs.

Tool changes were generally described as easy, with attachments clicking on, staying secure, or being simple to use.

Tool changes were generally described as easy, including a removable wand, snap-together pieces, and convenient switching on attachments.

Under-furniture pickup was mixed-to-negative; wand/tools helped some users, but the bulky ball limited precision and low-clearance reach.

Above-floor and upholstery cleaning was a strength because the wand, hose, and attachments were useful on sofas, stairs, furniture, and high areas.

Above-floor and upholstery use was praised with the canister, wand, and included tools for couches and other surfaces.

Versatility was strong for tool-based cleaning, although one professional review noted it was less versatile than some uprights.

Reviewers described the vacuum as versatile, with many ways to use it and a broad budget feature set.

Weight was one of the most repeated drawbacks, with reviewers calling it heavy or difficult to lug, despite some tool-based workarounds.

Weight was a major strength, with reviewers repeatedly describing the vacuum as very light or feather light.