IP44 vs IP32
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP44 and IP32 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in solid-object protection (level 4 vs 3) and liquid protection (level 4 vs 2). IP44 is rated for > 1 mm — small wires and splashing water (all directions), while IP32 provides > 2.5 mm — tool / wire and dripping water at 15° tilt.
IP44 protects against small solid objects (1 mm) and splashing water from any direction. It is the common minimum rating for outdoor-covered fixtures and bathroom zone equipment.
Under IEC 60529, IP32 specifies protection against solid objects larger than 2.5 mm and protection against vertically falling drops of water when the enclosure is tilted up to 15° from its normal position.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 3 with second-digit (liquid) level 2.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP44
4 — > 1 mm — Small Wires
IP32
3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP44
4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
IP32
2 — Dripping Water at 15° Tilt
Dust-tight
IP44
No
IP32
No
Water-jet resistant
IP44
No
IP32
No
Submersible
IP44
No
IP32
No
Outdoor suitable
IP44
Yes
IP32
No
The exact difference (IP44 vs IP32)
Solid protection
IP44
Level 4 — > 1 mm — Small Wires
IP32
Level 3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
IP44 provides "> 1 mm — Small Wires" (level 4), while IP32 provides "> 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire" (level 3). IP44 is 1 level higher.
Liquid protection
IP44
Level 4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
IP32
Level 2 — Dripping Water at 15° Tilt
IP44 handles 50–100 kPa (Splashing Water (all directions)), while IP32 handles 0.3 mm/min drip rate (Dripping Water at 15° Tilt). IP44 provides 2 levels more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP44 offers higher overall protection than IP32. Choose IP44 for harsher environments; IP32 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.