Red light · Compare
Hooga PRO300 vs Hooga HG300
The PRO300 is the higher-spec panel on paper, but be realistic about the numbers: the HG300's real measured output is about 55 mW/cm², and the PRO300's 109 is an unverified manufacturer claim, not an independent reading. We score the HG300 on its measured figure and flag the PRO300's as a claim only. Both are honest-value budget options; do not assume the PRO300 actually doubles the HG300.
The most common Hooga question. The HG300 (single-chip) was independently measured at about 55 mW/cm² at 6 inches by Light Therapy Insiders; the PRO300 (dual-chip) claims over 109 but has no independent measurement we can find, and that 109 is a solar-meter-style manufacturer figure. Both are budget targeted panels with the same 3-year warranty.
| $299 | Price | $199 |
| 109 mW/cm² | Irradiance @6in | 55 mW/cm² |
| $0.43 | Cost per cm² | $0.31 |
| 660/850 nm | Wavelengths | 660/850 nm |
| 700 cm² (half body) | Coverage | 645 cm² (targeted) |
| registered/listed only | FDA | none claimed |
Score breakdown
| 6.0 | Verified Irradiance30% | 8.0 |
| 8.0 | Wavelengths20% | 8.0 |
| 10.0 | EMF & Flicker15% | 10.0 |
| 7.0 | Value20% | 10.0 |
| 6.0 | Build & Coverage15% | 3.0 |
FAQ
- Is the PRO300's 109 mW/cm² claim accurate?
- We could not find an independent measurement of the PRO300, so we do not credit 109 as a verified figure; it is a manufacturer solar-meter-style claim. For reference, the closely related HG300 was independently measured at about 55 mW/cm² at 6 inches, well under its own claim, so treat the PRO300's 109 with the same skepticism.