English · العربية · فارسی · עברית · Русский · 中文 · Español · Français

Arrow 2 vs Shahed-238: Cost-Exchange Ratio & Combat Analysis

Compare 2026-03-21 3 min read

Overview

This analysis compares the Arrow 2, a Israel Endo-atmo BMD system costing $3.0M per unit, against the Shahed-238, an Iranian Jet drone costing $75K per unit. The cost-exchange ratio of 40.0:1 favors the attacker — meaning it costs the defender 40.0x more to intercept than the missile cost Iran to produce. At Operation Epic Fury burn rates of 1.5/day, the Arrow 2 inventory of 85 units faces depletion in approximately 56 days. Endo-atmospheric interceptor for medium-range ballistic missiles, combat-proven Jet-powered attack drone with 2,000km range and 85kg warhead — faster than Shahed-136

Side-by-Side Specifications

DimensionArrow 2Shahed 238
Unit Cost $3.0M $75K
Cost-Exchange Ratio 40.0:1 40.0:1
Range Endo-atmo BMD 2000 km
Inventory ~85 ~500
Annual Production 25/yr
Role Endo-atmo BMD Jet drone
Manufacturer IAI + Boeing Iran / IRGC
Fuel Solid rocket

Head-to-Head Analysis

Cost-Exchange Economics

The Arrow 2 costs $3.0M per unit while the Shahed-238 costs just $75K, creating a 40.0:1 cost-exchange ratio. Highly unfavorable for the defender. Extended engagements at this ratio are unsustainable. Iran can produce 40 Shahed-238 units for the price of a single Arrow 2 interceptor.
The Shahed-238 has a 40.0:1 cost advantage over the Arrow 2. This asymmetry is a key factor in the conflict's economic sustainability.

Inventory & Depletion

Coalition forces have approximately 85 Arrow 2 interceptors with annual production of 25 units. Iran maintains an estimated 500 Shahed-238 units with high-volume production capacity. At Operation Epic Fury burn rates of 1.5/day, the Arrow 2 inventory of 85 units faces depletion in approximately 56 days.
Iran holds a 6:1 inventory advantage in this matchup.

Tactical Engagement

The Arrow 2 engages the Shahed-238 during the flight phase. With 2000km range, the Shahed-238 can be launched from deep within Iranian territory, complicating launch detection. Combat-proven vs MRBMs.
The Arrow 2 is designed to counter threats like the Shahed-238, but sustained engagement at 40.0:1 cost ratios creates long-term sustainability challenges.

Scenario Analysis

Mass salvo of Shahed-238 missiles

In a saturation attack using Shahed-238 systems, the Arrow 2 battery would need to engage multiple targets simultaneously. At $3.0M per interceptor, a salvo of 5 Shahed-238 missiles would cost $375K to launch but $15.0M to intercept.
Shahed-238

Extended conflict (30+ days)

Over 30 days of sustained combat, the Arrow 2 inventory faces significant depletion pressure. Annual production of 25 units translates to just 0.1 per day — far below consumption rates during active operations. Meanwhile, Iran produces approximately 3.3 ballistic missiles and 6.7 drones per day.
Attacker (Iran) — production outpaces defender replenishment

Complementary Use

The Arrow 2 should be integrated into a layered defense architecture, not relied upon as a standalone solution against Shahed-238 threats. Cost-effective lower-tier systems (Iron Dome at $80K, or Iron Beam laser at $2/shot) should handle cheaper threats when possible, preserving expensive Arrow 2 interceptors for high-value targets.

Overall Verdict

The Arrow 2 vs Shahed-238 matchup produces a 40.0:1 cost-exchange ratio favoring the attacker. This is one of the most economically asymmetric engagements in modern warfare. For sustained conflict planning, interceptor production ramp-up and cost-reduction programs are critical to maintaining defensive capability.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Topics

Iron Dome vs Shahed-238 Arrow 2 vs Shahed-136 Arrow 3 vs Shahed-238 Arrow 2 vs Emad Arrow 2 vs Fateh-110 Arrow 2 vs Fattah-2

Related News & Analysis