Joby vs Archer: FAA Certification 2026
Joby vs Archer eVTOL certification 2026: where each sits in the FAA type certification process, and why first revenue likely lands in the Gulf.
Organizational byline
Updated July 16, 2026
6 min read
There is no defensible public-record answer to “who wins” the Joby-versus-Archer FAA certification race. The neutral baseline is simpler: the US Government Accountability Office reported that, as of March 2026, the FAA had not type-certificated any manned electric aircraft design for commercial operations.
Both Joby and Archer have since reported material progress. Joby has an FAA-conforming aircraft flying in preparation for Type Inspection Authorization testing. Archer says it has closed Phase 3 of its four-phase framework and is performing Phase 4 work. Those disclosures use different progress frameworks and are supplied by the applicants, so the percentages and phase labels should not be placed in a single league table.
The public-record snapshot
| Question | Joby | Archer |
|---|---|---|
| FAA special-class airworthiness criteria issued? | Yes | Yes |
| Latest detailed company certification disclosure reviewed | Q1 2026 shareholder letter, data at 1 May | Q1 2026 results, released 11 May |
| Company-reported milestone | First FAA-conforming aircraft for TIA flying; Stage 4 and Stage 5 work reported | Phase 3 closed; Phase 4 formal testing and analysis under way |
| FAA type certificate issued? | No public FAA issuance identified | No public FAA issuance identified |
The most important row is the last one. A company milestone can reduce programme risk without being a type certificate.
What the government record establishes
GAO's May 2026 report gives the cleanest independent picture. It found that the FAA was evaluating electric-aircraft designs case by case and that Joby and Archer were the only two of 14 eVTOL projects for which the agency had issued special-class airworthiness criteria by March 2026.
Those criteria matter because powered-lift designs combine characteristics that do not fit neatly into the conventional airplane or rotorcraft categories. The FAA's active AC 21.17-4 provides guidance for type, production and airworthiness certification of powered-lift under the special-class route in 14 CFR 21.17(b).
GAO also said the timing of commercial operation was unclear. That should carry more editorial weight than a projected service date in an investor presentation.
Joby's reported position
Joby's Q1 2026 shareholder letter says its first FAA-conforming aircraft for TIA, N547JX, had begun flying. It describes the aircraft as the first of a fleet being produced to support TIA testing, with initial Joby-pilot work intended to precede FAA-pilot testing.
For data at 1 May 2026, Joby reported:
- Stage 4, testing and analysis: 82% complete on Joby's side and 75% on the FAA side;
- Stage 5, show and verify: 15% complete on Joby's side and 6% on the FAA side.
The company expressly warns that completion percentages can fluctuate as documents are edited and resubmitted. The percentages are useful as a consistent view of Joby's own programme over time; they are not an FAA scorecard comparing Joby with another applicant.
The conforming-aircraft milestone is more concrete than a forecast. It means the aircraft is being assembled and documented to designs and test plans accepted for certification work. It still does not say when all required showing, finding and approval activity will be complete.
Archer's reported position
Archer's Q1 2026 results say that in April it became the first eVTOL company, based on information available to Archer, to close Phase 3 of the FAA's four-phase type-certification process.
Archer says Phase 4 work was already under way in parallel. It describes that phase as the point where Midnight's compliance with airworthiness requirements is demonstrated through formal testing and analysis, building on the certification basis, means of compliance and test plans established earlier.
In its March full-year update, Archer also said the FAA had accepted 100% of Midnight's means of compliance. That establishes the agreed methods the applicant plans to use to show compliance. It does not establish that every compliance demonstration has been completed or accepted.
Why the phase labels do not compare directly
Joby publishes a five-stage chart. Archer describes a four-phase framework. Both are ways of communicating a long certification programme, but their bins and completion methods are not identical.
A comparison that says “Stage 5 beats Phase 4” would therefore create precision the source material does not support. A more useful comparison asks observable questions:
- Has the FAA established the certification basis and airworthiness criteria?
- Are the means of compliance and test plans accepted?
- Are conforming articles available for certification-credit testing?
- Has TIA testing begun, and what work remains?
- Has the FAA issued the type certificate?
The last question is the legal finish line. The earlier questions are evidence of progress toward it.
Early operations are not the same as type certification
Both companies discuss possible 2026 activity under the US eVTOL Integration Pilot Program and activity in foreign jurisdictions. Those pathways may permit demonstrations or defined early operations under separate authorities. They should not be presented as evidence that the FAA has issued a standard type certificate for the aircraft.
The same distinction applies internationally. A restricted or limited foreign approval can be commercially significant without answering the US type-certification question.
What would change this assessment
The next high-value evidence would be an FAA-issued document or a company filing tied to a verifiable certification event, such as:
- FAA participation in certification-credit TIA flight testing;
- accepted completion of major compliance-test blocks;
- an FAA type certificate data sheet and issued type certificate; or
- FAA airworthiness and operating approvals for the intended commercial configuration.
Until one company produces a materially later event that the other has not reached, declaring a winner is analysis by headline rather than by record.
Bottom line
Joby has publicly shown a conforming aircraft flying and reports work in the testing and show-and-verify stages. Archer reports that it has closed its Phase 3 and is conducting Phase 4 formal testing and analysis. Both milestones are material; their numbering systems are not directly comparable.
The government record still supplies the controlling conclusion: neither programme had an FAA type certificate in the latest neutral review, and no later public FAA issuance was identified in this 16 July 2026 update. Treat company dates as forward-looking until an agency record turns them into approvals.
