IP27 vs IP65
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP27 and IP65 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in solid-object protection (level 2 vs 6) and liquid protection (level 7 vs 5). IP27 is rated for > 12.5 mm — finger and temporary immersion (up to 1 m), while IP65 provides dust-tight and water jets (6.3 mm nozzle).
The IP27 classification guarantees protection against solid objects larger than 12.5 mm and protection against the effects of temporary immersion in water. Ingress of water in quantities causing harmful effects shall not be possible.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 2 with second-digit (liquid) level 7.
IP65 is dust-tight and resists low-pressure water jets (6.3 mm nozzle, 30 kPa). It is the most common standard for fully exposed outdoor electronics such as lighting, cameras, and EV chargers.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP27
2 — > 12.5 mm — Finger
IP65
6 — Dust-Tight
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP27
7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP65
5 — Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)
Dust-tight
IP27
No
IP65
Yes
Water-jet resistant
IP27
Yes
IP65
Yes
Submersible
IP27
Yes
IP65
No
Outdoor suitable
IP27
Yes
IP65
Yes
The exact difference (IP27 vs IP65)
Solid protection
IP27
Level 2 — > 12.5 mm — Finger
IP65
Level 6 — Dust-Tight
IP27 provides "> 12.5 mm — Finger" (level 2), while IP65 provides "Dust-Tight" (level 6). IP65 is 4 levels higher.
Liquid protection
IP27
Level 7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP65
Level 5 — Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)
IP27 handles Hydrostatic ~10 kPa at 1 m (Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)), while IP65 handles 30 kPa (Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)). IP27 provides 2 levels more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP65 offers higher overall protection than IP27. Choose IP65 for harsher environments; IP27 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.