Shark CH950UKT review 2022

A great budget handheld vacuum that can clean most spillages with its powerful suction and clever attachments. Short run-time is a letdown, though.

  • Great for pet hair
  • Annoying dust-release button
No reviews yet. Write a review


Capacity (litres)0.45
AccessoriesCrevice tool, Pet tool, Scrubbing brush
Warranty (years)2
Surface typeCarpet, Hard floor
ColourBlack and yellow
Run time (minutes)10
Charge time (hours)4
Washable filter
Performance ★★★★★
Run time★★★★★
Overall Finder score★★★★★

Shark CH950UKT handheld vacuum review

How well does this model clean?

We tested this Shark handheld vacuum cleaner on carpet to see how well it fared tackling Cheerios, biscuit crumbs and rice.

With 3 sweeps, it picked up around 90% of the cereal, turning some of it to dust in the process. It did blow a few Cheerios away, though, when we used the motorised tool, so to get the rest, we switched to the (smaller) dusting brush, which did the job. So it pays to know which attachment to use. Due to its 0.45 litre capacity, it picked up a lot more than Shark’s 0.1 litre WandVacs, which spat out surplus Cheerios once the chamber was full.

This vac created a bit of a mess when faced with rice – despite cleaning 80% of the amount in 3 sweeps. As soon as we started to clean it up, the vent blew the rice that wasn’t collected in different directions.

This Shark fared well at cleaning biscuit crumbs on carpet, with around 90% of the mess gone in 3 sweeps.

The model excelled in our cereal and rice test on hard floors, picking up all the debris within 3 sweeps. We found the dusting brush was the best tool for this.

Image description
With the dusting brush, it cleaned all the cereal in 3 sweeps without blowing any away. Finder

On our biscuit-crumbs-on-the-sofa test, the crevice tool did the job in practically one sweep.

Can the Shark CH950UKT clean pet hair?

This model is designed to sweep up pet hair with its motorised detachable tool, so we set it to work on dog hair spread over a velvet orange sofa and onto carpet. It worked wonders on the sofa, cleaning most of the hair in 3 sweeps. Just a few larger clumps needed a bit of help when they got stuck on the tool’s head. For more finicky strands, we attached the brush head to scrape them up and after 4 more sweeps nearly all the hair was gone.

Image description
The motorised tool swept nearly all the pet hair off the sofa in 3 sweeps.Finder

On carpets, the motorised tool devoured nearly all the dog hair in just 3 sweeps. The brush tool again removed the remaining strands.

Image description
In 3 sweeps, most of the pet hair was cleaned off the carpet.Finder

Overall, this model glided over carpets with its motorised pet tool and didn’t get clogged.

What’s the run time of the Shark CH950UKT?

The stated run time after 4 hours of charge is 10 minutes, like the Black and Decker Dustbuster pair we’ve reviewed. This is short compared to other models with a 4-hour charge time. The Gtech Multi MK2K9 lasts 20 minutes, while the Dyson V7 Trigger (with a 3.5-hour charge time) hits the sweet 30-minute mark.

Considering the budget price and performance, we think the run time is adequate, but more suited for small burst cleaning of messes rather than a full-blown clean-up of your car.

How convenient is this model?

Aside from its lack of a charging dock, the CH950UKT is convenient. Its 0.45 litre capacity trumps other handhelds we reviewed, aside from the 0.54L Dyson V7 Trigger and the 0.56L Black and Decker Dustbuster Flexi PD1020LPGB. This means you won’t be rushing back and forth to the bin to empty it, unlike the Shark WandVacs.

One niggle is that while it does have an automatic dust-release button, this doesn’t open easily. You may have to manually jiggle the release over the bin to empty its contents.

As it’s a larger, upright machine it’ll be trickier to store than other models we reviewed, but it’ll certainly slot into the corner of a cabinet, at almost 50cm long.

Is the Shark CH950UKT easy to use?

This Shark has a good range of cleaning tools (motorised pet tool, crevice tool and brush) to do the basic jobs, but it won’t clean the top of cabinets well (unless you have a stepladder handy). A much better vac for hard to reach areas is the Black and Decker Dustbuster Pivot.

Aside from that, this Shark is lightweight and easy to manoeuvre. You’ve got a handle for that firm grip and the tools are simple to detach and attach to the body. It is slightly heavy at 1.4kg so you’ll only be able to clean heights for a short while until your forearm tires.

Shark CH950UKT customer reviews

On the whole, this model has excellent reviews with 4.5 stars on Amazon from almost 2,000 ratings (1,700/1,900 were positive). Some call it their “new best friend” and revel in its ability to pick up pet hair, general suction power and ease of use. The recurring concern is its 10-minute battery span. (Based on 1,950 reviews, last updated May 2022).

Pros and cons


  • Excellent at picking up pet hair
  • Great suction and smooth cleaning
  • Simple accessories
  • Large capacity
  • Budget buy


  • Short run-time
  • Niggly dust release button
  • Heavy for height cleaning

Our verdict: Is the Shark CH950UKT any good?

Yes. It’s a top budget handheld vac and will pick up most mess without much fuss. Pet owners, consider this model. It’ll also sweep up well on hard floors and carpets. We wish it had a longer run time, and its dust release button is a bit fiddly, but overall these factors shouldn’t deter you from considering this model to clean your house.

Frequently asked questions

Finder handheld vacuum cleaners scores

★★★★★ — Excellent
★★★★★ — Good
★★★★★ — Average
★★★★★ — Subpar
★★★★★ — Poor
We rate handheld vacuums based on the aspects that matter to you. We explain what goes into our scores in our guide to ratings.
The offers compared on this page are chosen from a range of products we can track; we don't cover every product on the market...yet. Unless we've indicated otherwise, products are shown in no particular order or ranking. The terms "best", "top", "cheap" (and variations), aren't product ratings, although we always explain what's great about a product when we highlight it; this is subject to our terms of use. When making a big financial decision, it's wise to consider getting independent financial advice, and always consider your own financial circumstances when comparing products so you get what's right for you.

Review by

Reemul is a writer at Finder, specialising in product reviews and news. He's a qualified journalist having worked at local papers in the UK covering breaking news, food and restaurant reviews. He has an MA in Film from UCL and a BA in History and French from Durham University.

Expert review

In the Shark handheld range, the CH950UKT differs from its cousins, the WandVac models, which are the only other handhelds that Shark makes. This one is much bigger and a bit heavier. But with greater size comes more capacity, and here’s where this vac excels. It’ll pick hold a lot more than the dainty WandVacs.

We tried it on Cheerios, rice, biscuit crumbs and pet hair. Its narrow crevice tool sucks up dirt around sofas and picks up annoying biscuit crumbs, and its brush tool conveniently sweeps up pet hair without a snag. While it does have a quick release button, this can get stuck and you’ll have to pry it open with your fingers. Another concern is its run time – we wish it was longer than 10 minutes. It doesn’t have a charging dock – many other models do – but this is a minor inconvenience.

Ask an expert

You are about to post a question on

  • Do not enter personal information (eg. surname, phone number, bank details) as your question will be made public
  • is a financial comparison and information service, not a bank or product provider
  • We cannot provide you with personal advice or recommendations
  • Your answer might already be waiting – check previous questions below to see if yours has already been asked

Finder only provides general advice and factual information, so consider your own circumstances, or seek advice before you decide to act on our content. By submitting a question, you're accepting our Terms of Use and Privacy and Cookies Policy.
Go to site