The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has released a study showing that Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) safeguards are lacking across brands, with most of the 14 partially automated systems tested receiving “marginal” or “poor” ratings.
In a press release shared on Tuesday, the IIHS released early results from the new ratings system, noting that partial automation systems from Tesla, Ford, Nissan, and most other automakers that were tested were lacking in multiple categories. The study offered ratings of good, acceptable, marginal or poor, both overall and in specific categories.
Level 2 systems like Tesla Autopilot can improve drivers’ attentiveness: IIHS study
“We evaluated partial automation systems from BMW, Ford, General Motors, Genesis, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Tesla and Volvo,” said David Harkey, IIHS President. “Most of them don’t include adequate measures to prevent misuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what’s happening on the road.”
Of the 14 partially automated systems tested thus far, only one system from any automaker was deemed acceptable, while two were rated marginal, 11 were rated poor, and none were rated good. The categories that were individually rated for each system included driver monitoring, attention reminders, emergency procedures, lane change, adaptive cruise control (ACC) resume, cooperative steering, and safety features.
The IIHS gave both Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems poor ratings overall, while Volvo Pilot Assist, Nissan ProPilot, Mercedes Active Distance Assist Distronic, Ford BlueCruise and several others were rated poor. Driver monitoring and attention reminders were some of the lower-rated categories across most brands, highlighting the ability for drivers to trick systems into thinking they’re being fully aware.
The research non-profit also noted that there was “little” evidence to support that partially automated systems like these are actually at the point that they currently make driving safer—though most companies target safety as a number one goal with ADAS programs.
“Some drivers may feel that partial automation makes long drives easier, but there is little evidence it makes driving safer,” Harkey said. “As many high-profile crashes have illustrated, it can introduce new risks when systems lack the appropriate safeguards.”
The top-rated systems in the index included Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive with an acceptable rating, along with the GM Super Cruise and Nissan ProPilot Assist with Navi-Link. Every other system was rated poor overall.
You can see the full category breakdowns from tests of Tesla’s Autopilot and FSD beta systems from the IIHS below, along with those of a few others.
Credit: IIHS
Credit: IIHS
Credit: IIHS
Credit: IIHS
Credit: IIHS
“These results are worrying, considering how quickly vehicles with these partial automation systems are hitting our roadways,” Harkey added.
“But there’s a silver lining if you look at the performance of the group as a whole. No single system did well across the board, but in each category at least one system performed well. That means the fixes are readily available and, in some cases, may be accomplished with nothing more than a simple software update.”
Below you can see overall ratings for each system tested.
| System Tested | Vehicle | Overall Rating |
|---|---|---|
|
Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive |
2022-2024 Lexus LS |
Acceptable |
|
GM Super Cruise |
2023-2024 GMC Sierra |
Marginal |
|
Nissan ProPILOT Assist with Navi-Link |
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya |
Marginal |
|
BMW Active Driving Assistant Pro |
2023-2024 BMW X1 |
Poor |
|
Ford BlueCruise |
2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E |
Poor |
|
Ford Adaptive Cruise Control with Stop & Go and Lane Centering Assist |
2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E |
Poor |
|
Genesis Highway Driving Assist 2 |
2023-2024 Genesis G90 |
Poor |
|
Genesis Smart Cruise Control/Lane Following Assist |
2023-2024 Genesis G90 |
Poor |
|
Lexus Dynamic Radar Cruise Control with Lane Tracing Assist |
2022-2024 Lexus LS |
Poor |
|
Mercedes-Benz Active Distance Assist DISTRONIC with Active Steering Assist |
2022-2023 Mercedes-Benz C-Class |
Poor |
|
Nissan ProPILOT Assist 2.0 |
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya |
Poor |
|
Tesla Autopilot version 2023.7.10 |
2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 |
Poor |
|
Tesla Full Self-Driving beta version 2023.7.10 |
2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 |
Poor |
|
Volvo Pilot Assist |
2022-2024 Volvo S90 |
Poor |
You can view the full list of rankings with individual category rankings from the IIHS here, or view the institute’s test protocol and rating guidelines here. Additionally, see the institute’s press release detailing the rating system’s early results here.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
Tesla dispels reports of ‘sales suspension’ in California
“This was a “consumer protection” order about the use of the term “Autopilot” in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.
Sales in California will continue uninterrupted.”
Tesla has dispelled reports that it is facing a thirty-day sales suspension in California after the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) issued a penalty to the company after a judge ruled it “misled consumers about its driver-assistance technology.”
On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that the California DMV was planning to adopt the penalty but decided to put it on ice for ninety days, giving Tesla an opportunity to “come into compliance.”
Tesla enters interesting situation with Full Self-Driving in California
Tesla responded to the report on Tuesday evening, after it came out, stating that this was a “consumer protection” order that was brought up over its use of the term “Autopilot.”
The company said “not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem,” yet a judge and the DMV determined it was, so they want to apply the penalty if Tesla doesn’t oblige.
However, Tesla said that its sales operations in California “will continue uninterrupted.”
It confirmed this in an X post on Tuesday night:
This was a “consumer protection” order about the use of the term “Autopilot” in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.
Sales in California will continue uninterrupted.
— Tesla North America (@tesla_na) December 17, 2025
The report and the decision by the DMV and Judge involved sparked outrage from the Tesla community, who stated that it should do its best to get out of California.
One X post said California “didn’t deserve” what Tesla had done for it in terms of employment, engineering, and innovation.
Tesla has used Autopilot and Full Self-Driving for years, but it did add the term “(Supervised)” to the end of the FSD suite earlier this year, potentially aiming to protect itself from instances like this one.
This is the first primary dispute over the terminology of Full Self-Driving, but it has undergone some scrutiny at the federal level, as some government officials have claimed the suite has “deceptive” naming. Previous Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was vocally critical of the use of the name “Full Self-Driving,” as well as “Autopilot.”
News
New EV tax credit rule could impact many EV buyers
We confirmed with a Tesla Sales Advisor that any current orders that have the $7,500 tax credit applied to them must be completed by December 31, meaning delivery must take place by that date. However, it is unclear at this point whether someone could still claim the credit when filing their tax returns for 2025 as long as the order reflects an order date before September 30.
Tesla owners could be impacted by a new EV tax credit rule, which seems to be a new hoop to jump through for those who benefited from the “extension,” which allowed orderers to take delivery after the loss of the $7,500 discount.
After the Trump Administration initiated the phase-out of the $7,500 EV tax credit, many were happy to see the rules had been changed slightly, as deliveries could occur after the September 30 cutoff as long as orders were placed before the end of that month.
However, there appears to be a new threshold that EV buyers will have to go through, and it will impact their ability to get the credit, at least at the Point of Sale, for now.
Delivery must be completed by the end of the year, and buyers must take possession of the car by December 31, 2025, or they will lose the tax credit. The U.S. government will be closing the tax credit portal, which allows people to claim the credit at the Point of Sale.
🚨UPDATE: $7,500 Tax Credit Portal “Closes By End of Year”.
This is bad news for pending Tesla buyers (MYP) looking to lock in the $7,500 Tax Credit.
“it looks like the portal closes by end of the year so there be no way for us to guarantee the funds however, we will try our… pic.twitter.com/LnWiaXL30k
— DennisCW | wen my L (@DennisCW_) December 15, 2025
We confirmed with a Tesla Sales Advisor that any current orders that have the $7,500 tax credit applied to them must be completed by December 31, meaning delivery must take place by that date.
However, it is unclear at this point whether someone could still claim the credit when filing their tax returns for 2025 as long as the order reflects an order date before September 30.
If not, the order can still go through, but the buyer will not be able to claim the tax credit, meaning they will pay full price for the vehicle.
This puts some buyers in a strange limbo, especially if they placed an order for the Model Y Performance. Some deliveries have already taken place, and some are scheduled before the end of the month, but many others are not expecting deliveries until January.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk takes latest barb at Bill Gates over Tesla short position
Bill Gates placed a massive short bet against Tesla of ~1% of our total shares, which might have cost him over $10B by now
Elon Musk took his latest barb at former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates over his short position against the company, which the two have had some tensions over for a number of years.
Gates admitted to Musk several years ago through a text message that he still held a short position against his sustainable car and energy company. Ironically, Gates had contacted Musk to explore philanthropic opportunities.
Elon Musk explains Bill Gates beef: He ‘placed a massive bet on Tesla dying’
Musk said he could not take the request seriously, especially as Gates was hoping to make money on the downfall of the one company taking EVs seriously.
The Tesla frontman has continued to take shots at Gates over the years from time to time, but the latest comment came as Musk’s net worth swelled to over $600 billion. He became the first person ever to reach that threshold earlier this week, when Tesla shares increased due to Robotaxi testing without any occupants.
Musk refreshed everyone’s memory with the recent post, stating that if Gates still has his short position against Tesla, he would have lost over $10 billion by now:
Bill Gates placed a massive short bet against Tesla of ~1% of our total shares, which might have cost him over $10B by now
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 17, 2025
Just a month ago, in mid-November, Musk issued his final warning to Gates over the short position, speculating whether the former Microsoft frontman had still held the bet against Tesla.
“If Gates hasn’t fully closed out the crazy short position he has held against Tesla for ~8 years, he had better do so soon,” Musk said. This came in response to The Gates Foundation dumping 65 percent of its Microsoft position.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk sends final warning to Bill Gates over short position
Musk’s involvement in the U.S. government also drew criticism from Gates, as he said that the reductions proposed by DOGE against U.S.A.I.D. were “stunning” and could cause “millions of additional deaths of kids.”
“Gates is a huge liar,” Musk responded.
It is not known whether Gates still holds his Tesla short position.
Tesla dispels reports of ‘sales suspension’ in California
New EV tax credit rule could impact many EV buyers
