“…On the other hand, to ensure low‐cost perovskite solar cell manufacturing, an ideal HTM candidate has to be easily affordable by simple synthetic schemes with minimized number of steps and easy workup and purification procedures for cost‐effective upscale. To date, molecular spiro‐type HTMs spiro‐OMeTAD [2,2′,7,7′‐tetrakis‐( N , N ‐di‐4‐methoxyphenylamino)‐9,9′‐spirobifluorene], FDT {2′,7′‐bis[bis(4‐methoxyphenyl)amino]spiro[cyclopenta(2,1‐b:3,4‐b′)dithiophene‐4,9′‐fluorene]}, and DDOF {2,2’,7,7′‐tetrakis‐( N , N ′‐di‐4‐methoxyphenylamine)dispiro‐[fluorene‐9,4′‐dithieno(3,2‐c:2′,3′‐e)oxepine‐6′,9′′‐fluorene]} reached the highest reported values over 19 % along with various other small‐molecule HTMs based on paracyclophane, truxene, benzotrithiophene, fluorene, carbazole, triazatruxene, anthratetrathiophene, phthalocyanine, indoloindole, and phenothiazine, successfully reaching comparably high photovoltaic performance. However, there are still only very few examples with a particular emphasis on low‐cost and highly efficient molecular HTMs such as spiroxanthene‐, fluorene‐, carbazole‐, and bifluorene‐based compounds including recently reported KR216 based on bifluorenylidene, and obtained by straightforward strategies showing that proper molecular engineering may be very fruitful toward low‐cost commercial solar cell application.…”