What is the difference between the advisor and the elephant in xiangqi?
These answers restate the rules implemented by our open-source engine, which follows the WXF laws for movement, checkmate and both repetition rulings: a side that forces a repetition by perpetual check or perpetual chase loses rather than drawing. The chase half has not been validated against the official casebook. Where an answer refers to a specific position, that position lives on the linked reference page, where the build verifies it before publishing.
Direct answer
The advisor moves one point diagonally and is confined to the palace, five points, ever. The elephant moves two points diagonally and is confined to its own half of the board by the river, seven points, ever. Both are defensive pieces that can only capture what comes onto their own points, and they guard against different things.
What each one actually stops
An advisor fills a palace point and denies it as a mating square, mainly against chariots and cannons attacking the general directly. An elephant covers the points a horse wants to land on and screens against soldiers approaching from a distance, working well outside the palace itself.
Why losing one of each hurts more than losing two of the same
A defence missing an advisor is weaker against chariot and cannon attacks specifically; a defence missing an elephant is weaker against horses and advancing soldiers. Losing one of each opens both kinds of attack at once, which is considerably worse than losing two advisors or two elephants and leaving one defensive category fully intact.
Related questions
Which is more important to keep, an advisor or an elephant?
It depends on what is attacking, advisors matter more against chariots and cannons, elephants more against horses and soldiers.
Do they ever defend the same point?
Never the same point: their reachable points do not overlap at all. The advisor has five palace points; the elephant has seven others, one of them the front centre of the palace.
.