Does manufacturing downtime really cost $260,000 an hour?

It is a widely repeated number credited to Aberdeen Research, but no carrier links or dates that report, and they do not agree on whether $260,000 is an average or a worst case. ABB's own 2023 survey of more than 3,200 maintenance decision-makers puts the cross-sector median at $125,000, less than half. Neither figure describes any specific plant.

Where does the number come from?

Both carriers we traced credit Aberdeen Research, an analyst firm. Neither links the report, names it, or gives a date, so the sample and method behind the number cannot be inspected.

What does downtime actually cost my plant?

It depends on your throughput, margin, labor, and any penalties. Calculate it from your own numbers; a single industry-average dollar-per-hour figure tells an individual line almost nothing.

Not necessarily, but it is unverifiable as published. The Aberdeen report behind it is never linked or dated, the carriers disagree on whether it is an average or a ceiling, and a same-page figure from ABB's own survey is less than half of it. Cite it with those caveats rather than as a settled fact.

Manufacturing economy

The '$260,000 an hour' downtime figure: who actually said it?

Manufacturing downtime costs about $260,000 an hour. The figure anchors nearly every article, vendor deck, and ROI pitch about uptime, quoted as if it were an established fact.

Trace it and the ground shifts, though not where you would expect. The carriers agree on the source: Aberdeen Research. What they do not agree on is what it means. One calls $260,000 an hour an average. The other says downtime can cost as much as $260,000 an hour, which is a ceiling. Neither links or dates the Aberdeen report, so there is no way to check which reading is right.

This page follows the $260,000 figure to the pages that carry it and is plain about what it is: a widely repeated number with an unreachable primary source and two incompatible descriptions of what it measures.

Data covers The '$260,000 per hour' manufacturing-downtime figure and its attribution. Published 2026-07-21. Last reviewed 2026-08-16. Last updated 2026-08-16. Edited by Mike Ramsey / Reliable Media.

The figures and where they come from

Each figure is rated for how safely you can cite it today. Ratings judge current usability, not whether a number was ever correct.

Figure	What it is	Source	Citation Confidence	Notes
$260,000 / hour	$260,000/hour, presented as an average	[A]	Low	One carrier writes that downtime costs manufacturers 'an average of' $260,000 per hour, crediting Aberdeen Research. No link, no date, no report title.
$260,000 / hour	The same $260,000/hour, presented as a ceiling	[B]	Low	A second carrier credits the same Aberdeen Research figure but writes that downtime 'can cost a company as much as' $260,000 an hour. Identical number, opposite meaning: a typical case in one telling, a worst case in the other.
$125,000 / hour	ABB's own survey median	[A]	Medium	On the same page as the $260,000 claim, the same carrier cites ABB's 2023 Value of Reliability survey of more than 3,200 plant maintenance decision-makers, whose cross-sector median is less than half the headline number. This figure names its method and sample size. The $260,000 names neither.

Why the numbers disagree

The attribution is actually consistent, and that is not the problem. Both carriers credit Aberdeen Research. What neither does is say which Aberdeen report, published when, measuring whom. There is no link and no date, so the citation cannot be followed to anything you could inspect. A number everyone agrees on the source of, and nobody can reach, is still an unverified number.

The tell is what happens to its meaning in transit. One carrier writes that downtime costs 'an average of' $260,000 an hour. The other writes that it 'can cost a company as much as' $260,000 an hour. Those are incompatible claims about the same figure: one says typical, the other says worst case. At least one of them is describing the underlying research wrongly, and a reader who meets only one has no way to tell which.

The same carrier that quotes $260,000 also quotes ABB's 2023 Value of Reliability survey, which asked more than 3,200 plant maintenance decision-makers and found a cross-sector median of $125,000 an hour. That is less than half, it sits in the same paragraph, and it is the figure with a stated sample and method. The bigger number is the one that travels.

The figure is also an average across wildly different situations. A minute of downtime on a high-volume automotive line and on a small job shop are not remotely comparable, so a single dollar-per-hour number averaged across all of manufacturing tells an individual plant almost nothing about its own cost.

How to cite these figures

If you cite $260,000 an hour, credit Aberdeen Research as the carriers do, and say plainly that the report is not linked or dated by any of them and that they describe it both as an average and as a maximum.

For your own plant, calculate downtime cost from your own numbers: lost throughput, margin, labor, and any penalty clauses. The industry average does not describe your line.

Be wary of any single dollar-per-hour downtime figure. The real cost varies enormously by product, volume, and how the downtime is handled.

Where people go wrong

Quoting $260,000 an hour as an established fact. It traces to an Aberdeen Research report that none of the carriers link, date, or name.

Applying an industry average to a specific plant. Downtime cost swings by orders of magnitude across products and volumes.

Assuming the figure means what your source says it means. One carrier calls it an average and another calls it a worst case, so check which claim you are repeating.

How we checked

We traced the $260,000-per-hour figure to the pages that carry it and confirmed the number appears in each. Both credit Aberdeen Research. We also confirmed that one describes it as an average and the other as a maximum, and that neither links or dates the underlying report.

We did not reach the Aberdeen report itself. No carrier we checked links or dates it, so its sample, method, and definition of downtime cost cannot be inspected. We therefore report the number as an unreachable citation rather than a measurement, and we quote ABB's $125,000 median beside it because that one states its sample.

Both figures are rated Low, not because downtime is cheap, but because the specific $260,000 number is an unverifiable average from marketing research, and it should not be cited as a neutral fact.

Full source list

Primary sources, with live links. Every figure above traces to one of these.

[A]SeqentAccessed July 14, 2026
Seqent, "The True Cost of Unplanned Downtime by Industry," citing the $260,000-per-hour figure to ABB's 2023 reliability study
https://seqent.com/the-true-cost-of-unplanned-downtime-by-industry/
[B]MachineMetricsAccessed July 14, 2026
MachineMetrics, "The Real Cost of Downtime in Manufacturing," citing the figure to a ServiceMax-sponsored study
https://www.machinemetrics.com/blog/the-real-cost-of-downtime-in-manufacturing

Common questions

Does manufacturing downtime really cost $260,000 an hour?: It is a widely repeated number credited to Aberdeen Research, but no carrier links or dates that report, and they do not agree on whether $260,000 is an average or a worst case. ABB's own 2023 survey of more than 3,200 maintenance decision-makers puts the cross-sector median at $125,000, less than half. Neither figure describes any specific plant.
Where does the number come from?: Both carriers we traced credit Aberdeen Research, an analyst firm. Neither links the report, names it, or gives a date, so the sample and method behind the number cannot be inspected.
What does downtime actually cost my plant?: It depends on your throughput, margin, labor, and any penalties. Calculate it from your own numbers; a single industry-average dollar-per-hour figure tells an individual line almost nothing.
Is the figure wrong?: Not necessarily, but it is unverifiable as published. The Aberdeen report behind it is never linked or dated, the carriers disagree on whether it is an average or a ceiling, and a same-page figure from ABB's own survey is less than half of it. Cite it with those caveats rather than as a settled fact.

More data, traced to source

Robot reliability numbers: the vendor claims and the one independent study
Manufacturers advertise robot uptime in the high nineties and mean time between failures in the tens of thousands of hours. The one independent study of more than 400 factories found a robot cell is reliable 88 percent of the time, with 87 minutes between failures.
Do robots really run 24/7? The measured runtime is far lower
The pitch is that robots run around the clock. The best measured data on manufacturing machine runtime shows a median of 32% and a weighted average of 54.5%. The 24/7 figure is a ceiling, not a norm.
The 3x robot integration rule: where the number actually comes from
The rule that a robot cell costs about three times the robot is quoted in nearly every automation-budgeting article. It traces to a consulting report almost nobody can open, quotable only through a single trade editorial.
Preventive versus predictive maintenance: what the savings actually are
The US Department of Energy puts predictive maintenance at 8% to 12% cheaper than preventive, and preventive at 12% to 18% cheaper than reactive. Other government estimates of maintenance cost disagree by a factor of four.