IoT applications need to consider many factors, such as node cost, network cost, battery life, data transfer rate (throughput), latency, mobility, network coverage, deployment type, etc. It can be said that no one technology can meet all the needs of IoT. NB-IoT and LoRa have different technical and commercial characteristics, so there will be differences in application scenarios. The difference between the two will be explained here, and the applicable application scenarios for each will be explained.

Frequency Bands, Quality of Service, and Cost LoRa work in the unlicensed frequency band below 1GHz, so there is no need to pay extra for the application. NB-IoT and cellular communications use licensed frequency bands below 1GHz. The frequency band between 500MHz and 1GHz is the best choice for long-distance communication because the actual size and efficiency of the antenna are quite advantageous.

LoRaWAN uses free unlicensed frequency bands and is an asynchronous communication protocol, which is the best choice for battery power and low cost. LoRa and LoRaWAN protocols have unique characteristics in handling interference, network overlap, scalability, etc., but they cannot provide the same quality of service (QoS) as cellular protocols. It is reported that the bidding price of the authorized Sub-GHz frequency band exceeds US$500 million per MHz. Cellular networks and NB-IoT cannot provide the same battery life as LoRa due to quality of service (QoS) considerations. Due to QoS and high frequency band usage fees, cellular networks, and NB-IoT are recommended for applications that need to ensure QoS, and LoRa is a good choice if low cost and a large number of connections are the first choice, as shown in the figure below.