We investigate the performance of different annealers for power flow analysis using adiabatic computing. The annealers include D-Wave's simulated annealer Neal, D-Wave's quantum-classical hybrid annealer, D-Wave's Advantages system (QA), Fujitsu's classical simulated annealer, and Fujitsu's digital annealer V3 (DA). We implement Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) and Ising model formulations, with the latter offering finer control over complex voltage adjustments. Different test systems are experimented with to systematically evaluate the annealers. The evaluation is based on the accuracy, the annealer's capability to handle the decision variables, and the computational time needed. QA and DA show superior performance over classical annealers for our application. DA effectively manages larger test systems, whereas QA encounters difficulties embedding the problem graph onto the hardware graph because of the limited qubit connectivity. This constraint confines QA to the 14-bus system with the QUBO formulation and the 4-bus system with the Ising model formulation. The best performance is associated with different annealers across different test systems, which suggests that adjusting the threshold can improve precision if the compiler and annealer are capable of handling the number of variables involved.