# Future Industrial Applications: Exploring LPWAN-Driven IoT Protocols
## 4 Performance Comparison
### QoS  
According to studies, cellular NB-IoT and LTE-M offer very low latency [78; 79]. LoRaWAN, in contrast to Sigfox, offers lower bidirectional latency. Speed and low latency are significant benefits of LTE-M. LTE-M can deliver speeds of up to 1 Mbps in the uplink and 384 Kbps in the downlink. In addition, LTE-M has a 50-100 ms latency, its nodes can transmit at more effective data rates, and the reduced latency allows for real-time communication between the nodes [47]. For RedCap, latency can vary from less than 500 ms to 10 ms depending on its use case [22; 34].  
While comparing IoT communication protocols, Sigfox emerged as the future protocol because of its low cost and broad reach. However, a low-power consumption module will work best for LoRa. Overall, LoRa is more compatible with all environments because of its security features and low cost, great range, and low power consumption [29; 47]. Table 2 provides a side-by-side juxtaposition of six dominant IoT communication protocols that are two wide-area protocols based on ISM bands (LoRa and Sigfox), three cellular protocols (NB-IoT, LTE-M, and RedCap), and a short-range ISM-based protocol (Z-wave). Figure 5 provides a graphical comparison among the different types of IoT communication proto cols (LTE-based NB-IoT and LTE-M, NR-based RedCap, ISM-based short range _Z_-wave, and ISM-based wide area network Sigfox and LoRa) from coverage, data rate, and energy efficiency points of view. The figure shows that LoRa and Sigfox are the most energy efficient while also delivering the longest coverage. Their low power consumption, high coverage, and cost-effectiveness make them indispensable solutions for IIoT applications in diverse use cases. While Z-Wave and the cellular technologies can offer better data rates compared to them, their power consumption is higher.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  
Figure 5: Performance comparison of different IoT communications protocols from coverage, data rate, and energy consumption points of view.  
Among all the requirements regarding IIoT communication systems, cost efficiency, coverage, and energy efficiency are three features of prime importance. The purchase and deployment of IoT devices need to be as inexpensive as possible because a large number of devices need to be deployed to create an efficient sensing or monitoring system in the industrial environment.  
Also, IoT systems will often be used across small to large geolocations depending on the industry size and purpose that need to be covered by the system. That is why transmission range and coverage are very important factors when deciding the suitable protocol for a scenario. Lastly, in some cases, IoT devices work in such industrial systems where continuous transmission and reception of data is not always necessary, but longevity is essential. Therefore, energy efficiency carries great significance in this area of communication protocols. Figure 6 provides a graphical comparison among the six types of IoT communication protocols from coverage and cost-efficiency points of view. Proprietary protocols such as LoRa, Sigfox, and Z-Wave are considerably cheaper compared to the licensed spectrum-dependent cellular options. Among them, Sigfox and LoRa can provide a good range, which makes them the best candidate for IIoT use cases. In Figure 7, we present a graphical comparison of the six IoT communication protocols (LoRa, Sigfox, Z-Wave, NB-IoT, LTE-M, and RedCap) from the perspective of the five most important parameters: transmission range, energy consumption, cost, battery lifetime, and data rate. Their low power consumption, broad coverage, and cost-effectiveness make them indispensable solutions for IIoT applications in diverse use cases. The rest of this paper explores the industry-specific understanding of LPWAN-based IoT deployment in various industrial application areas.