News
Elon Musk’s Tesla Model 3 cobalt-free strategy is ushering in an LFP battery movement
About a year ago, Tesla effectively shocked the electric vehicle industry by announcing that the Made-in-China Model 3 Standard Range Plus would be using lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries produced by Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL). It seemed like an unprecedented decision, considering the company’s image as a maker of fast, powerful, premium cars.
LFP batteries are cheaper to produce than NCM (nickel-cobalt-manganese) and NCA (nickel-cobalt-aluminum) batteries, but they generally have lower energy density. This meant that usually, vehicles equipped with LFP cells end up lacking in range and charging. Tesla’s move towards LFP could then be considered a gamble–one that could have resulted in drawbacks for the Model 3 in China.
Today, it seems safe to say that the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker’s gamble has been successful. Recent tweets from Elon Musk even point to the idea that LFP is the way to go for Tesla’s standard range vehicles. This was especially notable, considering that cobalt and nickel prices have been rising over the past years. And with the advent of more electric cars in the market, securing more long-term supply for raw materials is incredibly important.
True to form, Tesla’s adoption of LFP batteries was immediately felt by the greater battery market. As noted in a Mining.com report, the 55KWh LFP-battery Tesla Model 3 from China captured 5.9% of the global full electric car market in terms of battery capacity in its second full month of sales. This was despite the Made-in-China Model 3 not being sold in the United States.
Based on Adamas Intelligence data, the momentum of Tesla’s LFP-equipped Model 3 only increased from that point. Propelled further by deliveries to Europe, the LFP-battery China-made sedan comprised 46% of all Model 3 sales in January and a remarkable 32% of the battery capacity in all LFP-equipped cars globally. This trend, Adamas’ data showed, boosted LFP’s overall share in the global battery market in terms of capacity to 18.5% in January 2021.
This was a remarkable milestone for LFP batteries, considering that it only commanded 1% at the beginning of last year and 3% by June 2020. Adamas Intelligence’s Head of Data and Analytics Alla Kolesnikova noted that the momentum of LFP cells had been particularly felt in China. In 2020, the adoption of the cobalt-free batteries saw a resurgence in the market, with both veteran automakers and younger EV companies adopting the technology.
“LFP battery capacity deployed onto roads increased six-fold and we continue to see cathode manufacturers ramping up output and a growing list of the automakers in China announcing upcoming model-versions that will incorporate LFP cells. Among the more prominent are Xpeng, Seres, and VW,” Kolesnikova said.
Roskill, one of the world’s first management consultancies and a key player in critical materials supply chain intelligence, has determined that LFP cathode and precursor material manufacturing capacity is currently up 10-fold in January-February 2021 compared to the same months in 2020. A good part of this is the adoption of the batteries by notable EV players like Tesla, as well as breakthroughs in the cobalt-free batteries themselves.
Roskill analyst Kevin Gunan Shang noted that LFP batteries are looking to be an excellent fit for cell-to-pack manufacturing, which would be adopted by Tesla for its mass-market vehicles like the Model Y. The analyst also pointed to the claims of Volkswagen-backed Chinese battery manufacturer Gotion, which noted that its latest LFP battery had achieved a cell-level energy density of 210 Wh/kg, putting it on par with NCM 523.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
