Two headlamps worth lining up side by side. They score within a hair of each other, so it comes down to the details below.
| Petzl Nao RL | Fenix HM65R-T V2.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| GearScore | 67✓ | 67 |
| Max lumens | 1500 lm | 1600 lm✓ |
| Weight | 5.1 oz | 5.0 oz✓ |
| Beam distance | 200 m✓ | 185 m |
| Max runtime | 40 h | n/s |
| Price | $200 | $105✓ |
| Battery | Rechargeable | Rechargeable |
| Water rating | IPX4 | IP68 |
Highlighted cells mark the better spec: Nao RL in blue, HM65R-T V2.0 in amber. A blank spec is never counted as a win. Runtime is shown for context and is not scored, since makers publish it at different brightness levels. GearScore is the overall rating (0 to 100); re-weight it on the full headlamp comparison. Prices are current MSRP.
The Petzl Nao RL and Fenix HM65R-T V2.0 take different routes to the same job. They are close enough that this really is about which handful of specs you weight most.
The Nao RL is a longer beam (200 vs 185 m). The HM65R-T V2.0 is brighter (1600 vs 1500 lm), 3 g lighter, and $95 cheaper. Their GearScores land within a couple of points (67 vs 67), so neither runs away with it.
Pick the Nao RL if you care most about longer throw, which makes it the better call for your priorities. Pick the HM65R-T V2.0 if brightness and low weight matter more to you, or you are focused on your priorities.
The Fenix HM65R-T V2.0. It is brighter (1600 vs 1500 lm) than the Nao RL.
The Fenix HM65R-T V2.0. It is 3 g lighter than the Nao RL.
They are nearly tied at 67 and 67 on the default algorithm, so re-weight the score to your own priorities to break the tie.
It depends on your priorities. Go with the Nao RL for longer throw, or the HM65R-T V2.0 for brightness. The spec table above shows exactly where each wins.