The Best Shark Carpet Cleaners of 2026

We purchased the six Shark CarpetXpert models in this comparison ourselves: EX121, EX151, EX201, EX221, EX251, and EX304. We evaluated stain removal, hose and floor-nozzle suction, ergonomics, water handling, and versatility.

The results below describe that comparison and its test conditions. The ranked product list above is kept separate from the original competition results so readers can distinguish the displayed recommendations from individual test winners.

We were surprised to find that nearly all of Shark’s newer carpet cleaners outperformed their previous flagship model. That result suggests Shark made meaningful improvements to an already competitive design. At a high level, Shark’s carpet cleaner lineup breaks down into two main categories.

The first is a larger design that includes a hose, which can be used for scrubbing tough stains or handling above-floor cleaning tasks like stairs and upholstery. The second is a slightly smaller, lighter design that doesn’t include a hose and is typically sold at a lower price point.

The first-generation versions of these designs were the EX201 and the EX121. Since then, Shark has released several additional models with redesigned elements. That includes the EX300 series, which includes the EX304 that we evaluated.

One thing Shark does differently than many competitors is how they handle hoses. Each hose-equipped Shark model in this comparison (the EX151, EX201, EX251, and EX304) has that hose permanently onboard. That means the hose is always attached to the machine and ready to use. With most carpet cleaners, you need to locate the hose separately and attach it when you want to use it.

Shark’s approach makes switching to hose cleaning far more convenient, much like a traditional upright vacuum. It’s a meaningful usability advantage.

In terms of basic operation, all of Shark’s carpet cleaners work in the same fundamental way. You fill the clean water tank with water and Shark’s included cleaning solution, turn the machine on, and begin cleaning.

All the models we evaluated had two cleaning modes. One uses more water, which Shark calls Deep Clean, while the other uses less water and dries faster. All machines automatically dispense water as you move the cleaner back and forth across the carpet, unlike some other carpet cleaners that use a trigger-controlled spray.

Both the previous and new flagship models also include a third tank for undiluted oxy solution. This solution automatically mixes with the standard cleaning formula during operation, which is a distinctive feature. In our evaluations, we closely examined whether it had a noticeable impact on stain reduction.

Across the board, Shark’s carpet cleaners have very good ergonomics. They’re light, easy to push, and feel more like a well-designed upright vacuum than a bulky carpet cleaner. Even the heaviest model we assessed, the EX304, is still about one pound lighter than the average carpet cleaner in the testing database used for this comparison.

One particularly interesting model in the lineup is the EX151. It’s a hybrid design that combines the smaller, lighter body of the hose-less models with a full-onboard hose. Despite having a cord 5 feet longer than most, it’s still the second-lightest model in the lineup. And because it includes a hose, it effectively delivers the best of both worlds.

When it comes to raw power, Shark’s older models and the EX151 hybrid use 8-amp motors, while most newer models use more powerful 9.5-amp motors. Amperage describes electrical current draw; our suction and stain tests show how these designs perform in practice.

We conducted two different suction evaluations. The first measured suction directly at the hose for models that included one. The second was an unsealed suction evaluation, which measures suction at the floor nozzle. In our experience, unsealed suction is a better indicator of real-world carpet cleaning performance.

In the hose suction evaluation, the 9.5-amp models clearly came out ahead, with the EX304 producing the highest suction. It delivered significantly more hose suction than the previous flagship EX201.

In the unsealed suction evaluation, the results were much closer. All Shark models scored well above the average, which was impressive. One anomaly was the EX304. It showed higher-than-average sealed suction but noticeably lower unsealed suction compared to the other Shark models.

We suspect the above result is due to the EX304’s design. The EX304 is the only model that automatically shifts suction from the hose to the floor head when you lean the machine back. Other Shark models with hoses use a physical switch that you manually engage.

The automatic switching system is one possible explanation for the measurement difference, but we did not isolate it as the cause. Despite the lower floor-nozzle suction reading, the EX304 performed very well in our stain test.

For this review of the best Shark carpet cleaners, we applied exactly 10 mL of grape juice to white carpet samples and allowed the stains to dry for at least 24 hours. Each machine was then used exactly as directed, with the appropriate solution type and amount.

We performed four timed back-and-forth cleaning passes, allowed the carpet to dry fully, and then measured stain removal by analyzing the relative lightness of the carpet fibers using a colorimeter.

Overall, the stain reduction results were extremely impressive. Every model scored above average in our stain reduction testing, and in several cases, the stain was completely removed from the white carpet without any pre-treatment. That’s not something we typically see.

The EX304 achieved the best stain reduction score, but it was essentially tied with several newer models, including the EX221, EX151, and EX251. The first-generation EX201 and EX121 scored lower than the newer models, although both remained above the category average in this evaluation.

This result is especially notable because the EX201 won our 2024 overall carpet cleaner competition. That tells us Shark has meaningfully improved performance across the lineup rather than relying on a single standout model.

We ran a smaller set of hose-based stain trials and compared those results with the Shark StainStriker spot cleaner, which we assessed using the same method. The process involved spraying the stain, waiting five minutes, and scrubbing for one minute.

Using this approach, the EX304’s hose with its standard attachment scored 87.9. That matched the Shark StainStriker’s score in the hose comparison.

Based on this, we’d say the hose works very well for stairs, upholstery, pet beds, and other areas an upright cleaner can’t reach. However, for set-in carpet stains (especially with newer models), upright mode still delivers better overall results.

Attachment sets vary by model. All Shark models with hoses include a small brush built directly into the hose, which may be useful for very tight or hard-to-reach areas. They also all include a 3.5-inch reversible bristle tool, which we found to be the most useful attachment overall.

Some models include additional tools. For example, the EX151 adds a 7-inch wide path tool. Both the older and newer flagship models include a pet mess extractor tool designed for wet stains like urine, which pulls liquid into a removable reservoir.

The EX304 stands out by offering the most attachments and being the only model in this tested group with an onboard hose self-cleaning system. This system sprays water through the hose to clean it, which is especially valuable if you frequently handle messy jobs.

One area where Shark consistently falls short compared to competitors is water tank size. The models in this comparison have tank capacities of 0.53 to 0.6 gallons, compared with a 0.99-gallon average in the test database. This matters most if you’re cleaning multiple rooms in one session.

Using Shark’s low-water cleaning mode can help extend cleaning time between refills, but if you’re cleaning large areas, expect to empty and refill the tanks fairly often.

Shark CarpetXpert EX151: Listed first in the ranking above, the EX151 combines a 15.9-pound body, an onboard hose, and the longest cord in this tested lineup. Its stain reduction score of 90.1 was close to the EX304’s 90.5. It was our Best Value pick in the original comparison; compare the live prices in the product cards when deciding whether that value advantage still fits your budget.

Shark CarpetXpert EX304: Listed second above, the EX304 was the Best Overall winner in our original Shark comparison. It led that group in stain reduction and hose suction, and offered the most attachments plus onboard hose self-cleaning. At 18.8 pounds, it was heavier than the EX151, but still below the 19.9-pound category average used in that comparison.

Shark CarpetXpert EX201: Listed third above, the EX201 is the earlier model that won our 2024 overall carpet cleaner competition. It includes an onboard hose and delivered strong floor-nozzle suction in this comparison, though its 85.7 stain reduction score trailed the newer models. Consider its price alongside the EX151 and EX304 before choosing.

For larger areas, remember that all three have relatively small water tanks. To compare Shark with other brands, see our best carpet cleaners guide.