In the fast-paced world of commercial and architectural lighting, seeing a safety certification mark on an LED fixture or driver is non-negotiable. Whether you are specifying linear lighting for a hotel lobby or installing high-bay lights in a warehouse, the North American market demands compliance.
The two most common marks you will encounter on LED products are UL and ETL.
For lighting professionals, this often creates confusion: Is a fixture with an ETL mark acceptable for a high-spec commercial project? Will a local building inspector reject a lighting installation that isn’t “UL Listed”?
This article breaks down the practical differences between ETL and UL specifically for the lighting industry, helping you make informed decisions for your projects.
The Foundation: Both Are Legally Equal for Lighting
Before diving into the differences, it is crucial to establish the legal baseline for lighting installations in the US and Canada.
Both UL (Underwriters Laboratories) and ETL (Intertek) are Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTLs) accredited by OSHA.
What this means for lighting:
From a legal and code-compliance standpoint (such as the National Electrical Code – NEC), an LED strip light bearing the ETL mark holds the exact same legal validity as one bearing the UL mark. Both signify that a third-party lab has tested the product and confirmed it meets safety standards.
UL: The Historic Standard-Bearer in Lighting
Established in 1894, UL has a massive historical advantage. In the lighting world, UL is not just a tester; they are often the authors of the safety standards themselves.
For example, UL 2108 (Standard for Low Voltage Lighting Systems) and UL 1598 (Luminaires) are the benchmarks for safety. Because UL wrote the “rulebook” that the entire industry follows, many conservative lighting specifiers and older electrical inspectors view the UL mark as the gold standard.
- Lighting Context Pros: Unmatched recognition on spec sheets and by building inspectors.
- Lighting Context Cons: Certification can be slow and expensive, which can delay the launch of cutting-edge LED products.
ETL: The Agile Alternative for Modern LED
ETL is operated by Intertek, a global powerhouse in quality assurance. While they don’t typically write the lighting standards, they are masters at testing to them efficiently.
In the rapidly evolving LED industry—where new chip technologies and flexible designs emerge constantly—speed is vital. ETL has positioned itself as the faster, often more cost-effective partner for lighting manufacturers who need to get compliant products to distributors quickly.
- Lighting Context Pros: Faster turnaround times for testing new fixture designs; lower costs often translate to better pricing for distributors.
- Lighting Context Cons: Slightly lower brand awareness among end-consumers compared to UL.
Key Differences in Lighting Applications
If they are legally the same, why does it matter? Here is the practical reality for lighting applications:
1. Testing Standards (The Reality Check)
This is the most important point for specifiers: ETL tests lighting products to UL standards.
If you buy an LEDYi neon flex strip certified by ETL, Intertek has tested that strip rigorously against the UL 2108 standard. They do not have their own “easier” ETL standard. The safety requirements for thermal management, electrical shock protection, and fire resistance are identical regardless of which lab performs the test.
2. The “Electrical Inspector” Factor
Twenty years ago, some local building inspectors would only accept “UL Listed” fixtures. Today, that is rarely the case. Modern inspectors understand what an NRTL is and accept ETL readily. However, on very conservative projects or in specific jurisdictions, the UL mark may still offer a smoother path through final inspection simply due to long-standing habit.
3. Speed vs. Tradition
For a lighting manufacturer launching a new product line before a major trade show like LightFair, ETL’s speed is a major advantage. For a lighting designer working on a high-profile government building with strict legacy specifications, UL might be the required path.
Comparison Table: ETL vs. UL in Lighting
| Feature | UL (Underwriters Laboratories) | ETL (Intertek) |
| Lighting Standards Used | Authors & uses them (e.g., UL 1598, UL 2108) | Uses UL Standards (Tests to the same specs) |
| Code Compliance (NEC) | Accepted everywhere | Accepted everywhere (OSHA Recognized NRTL) |
| Speed to Market | Slower (High volume of applicants) | Faster (Crucial for rapid LED cycles) |
| Cost to Manufacturer | Higher certification & follow-up fees | More Cost-Effective |
| Inspector Recognition | The historical benchmark; universally known. | Widely accepted today; legally equivalent. |
Which Should You Specify or Buy?
Choose UL Listed Lighting If:
- Your project specification explicitly demands “UL Listed” (common in heavy industrial or rigid government contracts).
- You are dealing with a notoriously conservative local jurisdiction or inspector known for questioning non-UL marks.
Choose ETL Listed Lighting If:
- You are a distributor or contractor who needs the latest LED technology available quickly.
- You want high-quality, compliant lighting products without the “brand premium” cost sometimes associated with UL.
- You understand that ETL tests to the exact same UL safety standards and are confident in explaining this to clients if asked.
Conclusion
For the modern lighting industry, the battle between ETL vs UL is not about safety—it’s about business strategy and project requirements.
Both marks guarantee that the LED fixtures you are installing have passed rigorous North American safety standards. For many forward-thinking manufacturers and distributors, ETL provides the agility needed in the LED era without sacrificing a single degree of safety compliance.
