Boeing 787 vs Airbus A330neo
Wide-body twin-aisle competitors compared: cabin altitude, range, fleet commonality, fuel burn, and type rating considerations.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Pricing
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
List $292M (787-10), used 787-9 $130-160M
Airbus A330neo
List $300M (A330-900), used $120-150M
Pros & Cons
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
Pros
- +Lower cabin altitude (6,000 ft)
- +Higher humidity cabin
- +Larger windows with electronic dimming
- +Better fuel burn (RR Trent 1000 / GE GEnx)
Cons
- –Smaller cabin width vs A330neo
- –Battery / icing issues earlier in production
Airbus A330neo
Pros
- +Larger cabin width — passenger-preferred
- +Lower acquisition cost vs 787
- +Type-rating commonality with A330ceo / A350
- +RR Trent 7000 only — engine simplicity
Cons
- –Heavier than 787 — modestly higher fuel burn
- –Older fundamental airframe (A330 1994)
Best For
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
Long-haul carriers replacing 767/A340 (United, ANA, JAL, BA, Etihad)
Airbus A330neo
Carriers that already operate A330ceo or want A330/A350 commonality
Our Verdict
787 wins on cabin experience and modern airframe; A330neo wins on cost, commonality, and cabin width. Heavily dependent on existing fleet — A330neo for Airbus carriers, 787 for Boeing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is more comfortable?
787 wins on cabin altitude and humidity (less jet lag). A330neo wins on cabin width (more shoulder room in 9-abreast vs 787 9-abreast tight).
Free Practice Test
Test your aviation knowledge with our free 10-question quiz. No signup required.
Take Free Quiz