Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to categorize industrial clusters, and then compare three industrial clusters of three countries from the perspectives of hard environment, soft environment, factors from supply and demand sides, and the network mechanism. Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected through interview with cluster coordinators. Qualitative case studies were conducted. Findings – The center of excellence behaves well in nearly all aspects, while the spatially narrowly distributed specific center of innovation mainly exploits benefits from its concentrated sector. For the Chinese comprehensive technology incubator, relatively limited geographical space and broad sectorial distribution endow it with unclear strengths, implying the inadequacy of interconnectedness and industry relatedness mentioned by Porter. Research limitations/implications – Data were collected mainly from cluster coordinators, implying further data collecting and more comprehensive analysis. Practical implications – It only makes sense to compare industrial clusters that are comparable with each other. Elements must be matched to facilitate the network interactions, and hence the innovation performance of clusters. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the theoretical basis through it analyzing and clarifying the scales to measure industrial clusters, and answers the question: what is the situation of industrial clusters behaving in several aspects including hard environment, soft environment, supply, demand, network interactions and innovation performance? ; The authors thank the support of the project the Complexity of Cluster Innovation System of Knowledge Intensive Business Services: Empirical Study based on China, subsidized by innovation program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission.