With the sales launch, the EU data sheet also becomes due – and it contains figures that aren't available on any product page. The repair index for both Pro models is 3.14 out of 5 points, slightly higher than its predecessor. This improvement comes from a single category, while another has remained at its minimum for years.
Since June 2025, every smartphone sold in the EU has been required to carry an energy label, along with a product data sheet detailing battery life, durability, and repairability. These data sheets are now available in German for both new Pro models, published via Apple's own energy label directory – one for the iPhone 18 Pro and one for the iPhone 18 Pro Max. The values in these sheets are not from a testing laboratory but from Apple itself – the regulation mandates self-classification according to fixed categories.
Key Facts at a Glance
- The repair index for both models is 3.14 out of 5 points, compared to 3.04 last year.
- The improvement comes almost entirely from the Tools category, which gains half a point.
- The software updates score remains at 1.00 out of 5 – despite five years of guaranteed updates.
- Both devices remain in repairability class C on a scale from A to E.
- They achieve class A in the energy label itself.
Half a point for the tools
The EU breaks down repairability into six categories, each with 0 to 5 points, which together form the overall index. Four of these categories have remained unchanged, while two have changed. There is no difference whatsoever between Pro and Pro Max – both publications report identical values.
| Category | iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max | iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max |
|---|---|---|
| Overall index | 3,14 | 3,04 |
| Dissection depth | 2,75 | 2,65 |
| Fasteners | 3,80 | 3,80 |
| Tools | 2,55 | 2,05 |
| Spare parts | 4,00 | 4,00 |
| Software updates | 1,00 | 1,00 |
| Repair information | 5,00 | 5,00 |
Of the 0.10 point increase, the tools category accounts for the largest share: plus 0.50. This reflects the fact that more components can now be accessed with simpler equipment. The specific tools mentioned are not detailed in the documentation – only the score is listed, not the reasoning behind it.
The rest of the design should be largely the same as its predecessor. The disassembly depth is only slightly improved, while fasteners and spare parts availability remain exactly the same. That's not enough for the class: both generations are rated at C.
Why a point is stuck at 1.0
The most striking number is the lowest. The rating awards one out of five points for software updates, even though Apple promises five years of guaranteed security, bug fix, and feature updates in the same documents.
The reason lies in the system: Five years is the legal minimum. Points are only awarded for periods exceeding this. Therefore, anyone merely meeting the minimum requirement inevitably ends up with a score of 1.00 – regardless of how long the devices actually receive updates. With iPhones, the actual support period regularly exceeds the promised duration, but this isn't reflected in the rating.
This one category thus costs points structurally, without changing the repairability in the literal sense.
Where the two models differ
In terms of robustness and protection rating, the components are identical: at least 180 free drops without damage, reliability class B, IP68 with a tested immersion depth of 6 meters, scratch resistance level 5 according to Mohs, energy efficiency class A, and at least 1,000 charging cycles. The only difference lies in the battery.
| Info | iPhone 18 Pro | iPhone 18 Pro Max |
|---|---|---|
| Model identifier | A3714 | A3717 |
| Nominal capacity | 4,056 mAh | 5,391 mAh |
| Runtime per charging cycle | 52 hours | 62 hours |
The battery in both devices is not designed to be replaced by the user. The manufacturer's warranty is stated as a minimum of 12 months – this is the legally required information and says nothing about the two-year statutory warranty that applies in this country anyway.
What the index says about a genuine repair
An index of 3.14 sounds average, but it doesn't measure the cost or duration of a repair. It assesses accessibility, mounting, tool requirements, spare parts availability, and documentation – not the price of a screen replacement.
What's remarkable, therefore, is less the overall score than the pattern behind it: Apple excels in documentation and spare parts, but falls in the lower middle range when it comes to accessing the internal components. Those who want to open their iPhone themselves are more likely to be thwarted by the design than by a lack of instructions. How this translates into everyday use depends primarily on the battery – and why the battery will remain permanently installed in the iPhone for the foreseeable future is explained in our article on the EU's mandatory replaceable battery policy from 2027.
How the design has actually changed will become clear after the sales launch on September 18th, when the first devices are disassembled. Until then, the score remains the only indicator – and that comes from the manufacturer itself. It applies equally to both models: Display, weight, battery, and price clearly differentiate the Pro and Pro Max, while in terms of repairability, there is no difference whatsoever.
Do you even pay attention to the repairability index when buying a camera, or is the number just a formality for you, along with the camera, battery, and price? Feel free to disagree in the comments.
