ULA · USA
ULA · USA
| Atlas V | Metric | Vulcan Centaur |
|---|---|---|
| 18,850 kg | Payload to LEO | +44% more27,200 kg |
| 8,900 kg | Payload to GTO | +62% more14,400 kg |
| 58.3 m | Height | +6% more61.6 m |
| N/A+vastly greater | Cost per kg | ~$5,500/kg |
| 99.1% | Success Rate | +1% more100% |
| 2002+1% more | First Flight | 2024 |
| No | Reusable | No |
| ULA | Company | ULA |
| USA | Country | USA |
Payload to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) — relative scale
Payload to Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO)
2
Atlas V wins
1
Tied
4
Vulcan Centaur wins
Vulcan Centaur delivers 44% more more payload to LEO, making it the heavier lifter.
Vulcan Centaur has a higher success rate (100% vs 99.1%), indicating greater flight heritage.
Overall, Vulcan Centaur wins on more metrics (4 vs 2), though each rocket is designed for different mission profiles.
Vulcan Centaur is quite literally Atlas V's successor, so this pairing is less a rivalry than a generational handoff — and understanding why the handoff happened is the whole story. Atlas V has been ULA's workhorse since 2002, the longest-serving active US rocket, and its résumé is extraordinary: Curiosity and Perseverance's cruise stages, OSIRIS-REx, New Horizons, Solar Orbiter, Lucy, and Boeing's Starliner. But its first stage burned kerosene through a single Russian-built RD-180, and after Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea, US law barred the military from buying launches on that engine — a geopolitical guillotine that sealed Atlas V's fate regardless of its stellar record. Vulcan Centaur is the answer: a taller, more capable rocket whose first stage swaps the RD-180 for two American Blue Origin BE-4 engines burning cleaner liquid methane, topped by an upgraded twin-engine Centaur V upper stage that gives it roughly 44% more LEO capacity than a baseline Atlas V.
On raw performance Vulcan is the stronger everyday vehicle: ~27,200 kg to LEO and 14,400 kg to GTO in its six-booster configuration, versus a baseline Atlas V's 18,850 kg LEO / 8,900 kg GTO. The one caveat is that a maxed-out Atlas V 551 could actually loft slightly more raw mass to LEO (~29,420 kg), but only in an expensive five-solid configuration that is no longer available — so Vulcan is the more capable rocket you can actually buy. Neither is reusable — ULA's reuse concept was always a future SMART engine-pod recovery, not a landing stage — so this contest is decided on capability, cost, and availability rather than refurbishment economics. The catch is track record. Atlas V is nearly flawless: 110 flights, ~99.1% success, and a single partial (NROL-30, 2007) whose payload still reached a usable orbit. Vulcan is 4-for-4 on payloads delivered but has been bruised twice by solid-rocket-booster nozzle anomalies — Cert-2 in 2024 and USSF-87 in February 2026 — the latter serious enough that the Space Force paused Vulcan flights, with return to flight targeted for late 2026.
So which do you pick? For the heaviest national-security payloads to demanding high-energy orbits, Vulcan is the clear choice — it exists precisely because Atlas V couldn't be sold for those missions after Crimea, and its extra everyday performance and domestic supply chain are exactly what NSSL Phase 2 requires. But Atlas V isn't quite done: production ended in 2024 and ULA no longer sells it, yet it flew its final satellite mission (29 Amazon Leo craft on July 2, 2026) and its handful of remaining airframes are now reserved for crewed Starliner flights — a role where Atlas V's near-perfect reliability record and human-rating give it an edge Vulcan has not yet earned. In short: Vulcan for heavy new contracts and capability, Atlas V for the sold-out, reliability-critical Starliner backlog it will finish flying into the late 2020s. The two never really competed on the open market — one was engineered to replace the other.