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

Iron Dome vs Zolfagar: 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 Zolfagar, an Iranian SRBM costing $300K per unit. The cost-exchange ratio of 0.3:1 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 Solid-fueled short-range ballistic missile with 700km range and terminal guidance

Side-by-Side Specifications

DimensionIron DomeZolfagar
Unit Cost $80K $300K
Cost-Exchange Ratio 0.3:1 0.3:1
Range SHORAD 700 km
Inventory ~1,800 ~400
Annual Production 500/yr
Role SHORAD SRBM
Manufacturer Rafael Iran / IRGC
Fuel Solid rocket

Head-to-Head Analysis

Cost-Exchange Economics

The Iron Dome costs $80K per unit while the Zolfagar costs just $300K, creating a 0.3:1 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 400 Zolfagar 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 0.3:1 cost ratio, this is offset by economics.

Tactical Engagement

The Iron Dome engages the Zolfagar during the flight phase. At 700km range, the Zolfagar is primarily a medium-range threat. 5,000+ combat intercepts. 90%+ rate.
The Iron Dome is designed to counter threats like the Zolfagar, but sustained engagement at 0.3:1 cost ratios creates long-term sustainability challenges.

Scenario Analysis

Mass salvo of Zolfagar missiles

In a saturation attack using Zolfagar systems, the Iron Dome battery would need to engage multiple targets simultaneously. At $80K per interceptor, a salvo of 4 Zolfagar missiles would cost $1.2M to launch but $320K to intercept.
Zolfagar

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 Zolfagar 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 Zolfagar matchup produces a 0.3:1 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 Topics

Iron Dome vs Fateh-110 Iron Dome vs Emad Iron Dome vs Fattah-2 Iron Dome vs Ghadr-110 Iron Dome vs Hoveyzeh Iron Dome vs Khorramshahr-4

Related News & Analysis