Compared
FUT vs DHI hair transplant
These sit at opposite ends of the same procedure — FUT is about how much donor hair you can harvest, DHI is about how precisely it is placed.
| Factor | FUT | DHI |
|---|---|---|
| Stage of the procedure | Harvesting | Implantation |
| Maximum grafts per session | Highest of any method | Limited by placement speed |
| Scarring | One linear donor scar | Depends on the harvesting method used with it |
| Precision at the hairline | Depends on placement method used | Highest available |
| Session length | Shorter for a given graft count | Longer |
| Best suited to | Norwood 5–7, large coverage needs | Hairline refinement, dense packing |
| Typical cost | Lowest per graft | Highest per graft |
Which one you should have
They are not mutually exclusive: FUT can supply the grafts and DHI can place them. Framing them as competitors misrepresents both.
If your priority is maximum coverage from a limited donor area, FUT harvesting is hard to beat. If your priority is a hairline that survives close inspection, DHI placement is the strongest option.
For extensive loss, a plan combining FUT harvesting with DHI placement at the front is often the most efficient use of a finite donor supply.
Common questions
Can FUT and DHI be combined?
Yes. FUT determines how grafts are harvested and DHI how they are implanted, so the two can be used in the same procedure.
Which gives more grafts?
FUT harvesting yields the most grafts in a single session. DHI does not affect how many grafts are available, only how they are placed.
Which is better for Norwood 6 or 7?
Advanced loss usually needs the graft volume FUT provides. DHI placement may still be used at the hairline within the same plan.