These sit in different price classes - Q Acoustics Q Active 200 costs roughly 1.7x what KEF LSX does. Expect it to lead on paper; the question is whether the gap is audible enough in your room to be worth it.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Bass | A | Q Acoustics Q Active 200 digs deeper - 46Hz against 59Hz. |
| Built-in power | B | KEF LSX has the bigger amplifier (200W vs 100W RMS). |
| Connections | A | Q Acoustics Q Active 200 adds HDMI and phono. |
| Size | depends | KEF LSX is easier to place; Q Acoustics Q Active 200 is bigger, which usually goes with fuller bass. Your room decides. |
| Expandability | depends | Q Acoustics Q Active 200: a sub output; KEF LSX: a sub output. |
| Price | B | KEF LSX is cheaper - $1,250 against $2,098, about 40% less; arguably a different class. |
A Q Acoustics Q Active 200 B KEF LSX
depends neither is better in the abstract - it turns on your room, your system or how you will use them. Only specs published for both speakers are judged; anything missing on either side is left out rather than guessed.
Which should you choose?
Q Acoustics Q Active 200 is ahead, but only on 1 of the measured areas, and it costs about 68% more. That is a lot of money for a narrow margin on paper - KEF LSX looks like the sensible buy unless something else about the Q Acoustics Q Active 200 appeals to you. If a subwoofer is in your plans, the bass gap largely stops mattering - you would be crossing over above 59Hz anyway, which makes the cheaper KEF LSX much easier to justify. In a large or open-plan room, Q Acoustics Q Active 200 has the cabinet volume to fill it more easily; in a small room, near a wall or at desk distance, KEF LSX is the easier speaker to get right.
And remember what a spec sheet cannot show: how each looks in your room and whether the finish suits it, what dealer support and warranty are like where you live, and how they actually sound to you. If you can hear them first - ideally with your own music - that will tell you more than any number above.