Iron Dome vs Khorramshahr-4: Cost-Exchange Ratio & Combat Analysis
Compare
2026-03-21
3 min read
Overview
This analysis compares the Iron Dome, a Israel SHORAD system costing $80K per unit, against the Khorramshahr-4, an Iranian Heavy MRBM costing $2.5M per unit. The cost-exchange ratio of 0.0:1 favors the defender — meaning interception is cheaper than the attacking munition. At Operation Epic Fury burn rates of 60/day, the Iron Dome inventory of 1800 units faces depletion in approximately 30 days. Short-range rocket/mortar/drone defense system with 90%+ intercept rate Iran's heaviest MRBM — liquid-fueled, 3,000km range, 1,500kg warhead
Side-by-Side Specifications
| Dimension | Iron Dome | Khorramshahr 4 |
|---|
| Unit Cost |
$80K |
$2.5M |
| Cost-Exchange Ratio |
0.0:1 |
0.0:1 |
| Range |
SHORAD |
3000 km |
| Inventory |
~1,800 |
~50 |
| Annual Production |
500/yr |
— |
| Role |
SHORAD |
Heavy MRBM |
| Manufacturer |
Rafael |
Iran / IRGC |
| Fuel |
Solid rocket |
— |
Head-to-Head Analysis
Cost-Exchange Economics
The Iron Dome costs $80K per unit while the Khorramshahr-4 costs just $2.5M, creating a 0.0:1 cost-exchange ratio. Favorable for the defender — one of the few matchups where interception is cheaper than the threat.
The Iron Dome is one of the rare cases where the defender has a cost advantage, with interception cheaper than the threat.
Inventory & Depletion
Coalition forces have approximately 1,800 Iron Dome interceptors with annual production of 500 units. Iran maintains an estimated 50 Khorramshahr-4 units. At Operation Epic Fury burn rates of 60/day, the Iron Dome inventory of 1800 units faces depletion in approximately 30 days.
Coalition holds an inventory advantage, but at 0.0:1 cost ratio, this is offset by economics.
Tactical Engagement
The Iron Dome engages the Khorramshahr-4 during the flight phase. With 3000km range, the Khorramshahr-4 can be launched from deep within Iranian territory, complicating launch detection. 5,000+ combat intercepts. 90%+ rate.
The Iron Dome is designed to counter threats like the Khorramshahr-4, but sustained engagement at 0.0:1 cost ratios creates long-term sustainability challenges.
Scenario Analysis
Mass salvo of Khorramshahr-4 missiles
In a saturation attack using Khorramshahr-4 systems, the Iron Dome battery would need to engage multiple targets simultaneously. At $80K per interceptor, a salvo of 1 Khorramshahr-4 missiles would cost $2.5M to launch but $80K to intercept.
Khorramshahr-4
Extended conflict (30+ days)
Over 30 days of sustained combat, the Iron Dome inventory faces significant depletion pressure. Annual production of 500 units translates to just 1.4 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 Iron Dome should be integrated into a layered defense architecture, not relied upon as a standalone solution against Khorramshahr-4 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 Iron Dome interceptors for high-value targets.
Overall Verdict
The Iron Dome vs Khorramshahr-4 matchup produces a 0.0:1 cost-exchange ratio favoring the defender. For sustained conflict planning, interceptor production ramp-up and cost-reduction programs are critical to maintaining defensive capability.
Frequently Asked Questions
Related News & Analysis