“…Carefully adjusting the energy‐level matching and interface characteristics may further improve the PCE of OPV devices. [ 36 ] In this work, two donor polymers, poly[(2,6‐(4,8‐bis(5‐(2‐ethylhexyl)thiophen‐2‐yl)‐benzo[1,2‐b:4,5‐b′]dithiophene))‐alt‐(5,5‐(1′,3′‐di‐2‐thienyl‐5′,7′‐bis(2‐ethylhexyl)benzo[1′,2′‐c:4′,5′‐c′]dithiophene‐4,8‐dione)] (PBDB‐T) [ 37 ] and poly[(2,6‐(4,8‐bis(4‐fluoro‐5‐(2‐hexyldecyl)thiophen‐2‐yl)benzo[1,2‐b:4,5‐b′]dithiophene))‐alt‐(5,5‐(5‐octyl‐1,3‐di(thiophen‐2‐yl)‐4H‐thieno[3,4‐c]pyrrole‐4,6(5H)‐dione)] (TPD‐3F), [ 38 ] were systematically studied in the inverted device architecture and mixed with a typical NFA, 3,9‐bis(2‐methylene‐((3‐(1,1‐dicyanomethylene)‐6,7‐difluoro)‐indanone))‐5,5,11,11‐tetrakis(4‐hexylphenyl)‐dithieno[2,3‐d:2′,3′‐d′]‐s‐indaceno[1,2‐b:5,6‐b′]dithiophene (IT‐4F), [ 39 ] which was used as a BHJ layer. The detailed energy‐level diagram of each material in the device is shown in Figure .…”