Investor's Corner
Tesla Model 3 headlights gain the IIHS’ elusive ‘Good’ rating after design update
Earlier this year, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a nonprofit organization dedicated to reducing the number of accidents and injuries on the road, awarded the Tesla Model 3’s headlights with an “Acceptable” rating. While the IIHS’ tests gave a “Superior” rating for the vehicle’s front crash avoidance features then, the safety organization only listed the vehicle’s headlights as “Acceptable,” due to glaring issues from the Model 3’s low beams.
In a recent Twitter announcement, though, the IIHS noted that the Tesla Model 3 now earns a “Good” rating for its standard LED reflector headlights. The IIHS stated that the vehicle’s improved, updated score reflects the headlights of Model 3 that were produced after June 2018, a time when Tesla was starting to hit its stride with the production of the electric sedan.
The IIHS’ updated results could be seen in the Model 3’s page on the nonprofit’s website. So far, though, the IIHS has not released the Model 3’s official full safety ratings, which include metrics such as “Roof Strength” and “LATCH ease of use.”

That said, the Model 3’s “Good” rating for its headlights says a lot about Tesla’s focus on designing an incredibly safe electric car. The IIHS, after all, utilizes one of the strictest metrics for testing headlights. The headlights of the Tesla Model S, for one, were given a “Poor” rating by the IIHS. The Chevy Bolt EV’s headlights, which are incredibly bright, were also rated as “Poor.”
The IIHS evaluates headlights based on the lamps’ reach as the vehicle travels on straight and curved lines. Low beams are measured on five approaches — straightaways, left and right curves on an 800-foot radius, and sharp left and right curves on a 500-foot radius. The IIHS weighs low beams more heavily than high beams since they are used more often when driving. During the Model 3’s initial tests earlier this year, the vehicle’s low beams exhibited a 15.2% glare during straightways, preventing the Model 3 from earning the IIHS’ “Good” rating. As noted by the IIHS, this particular issue was addressed in Model 3 produced after Q2 2018.
The updated score of the Model 3’s headlights highlights Tesla’s unique tendency to update its vehicles as soon as improvements are available. This was pointed out by Elon Musk on Twitter, when he stated that when it comes to Tesla’s electric cars, there is “no such thing as a full refresh” since all vehicles are “partially upgraded every month as soon as a new subsystem is ready for production.” This practice was also mentioned by Tesla President of Automotive Jerome Guillen in an interview with CNBC, when he noted that the company’s technology is always in a process of evolution.
The 2018 Tesla Model 3 now earns a good rating for its standard LED reflector headlights for models built after June 2018. Previous models earn an acceptable rating. https://t.co/EUWXFLBnkm pic.twitter.com/TOctSTGaAl
— IIHS (@IIHS_autosafety) December 26, 2018
In a statement to CNET, IIHS senior vice president for communications Russ Rader explained the organization’s focus on headlights as a metric for vehicle safety. Rader also noted that headlights must be seen not just as a decorative component of a vehicle. Instead, they should be perceived as safety equipment.
“When one vehicle’s low beams only illuminate the right side of a straightaway for 148 feet, and another vehicle’s low beams allow a driver to see more than twice as far, there’s a problem. IIHS has incorporated headlight performance into our Top Safety Pick awards. We’re already seeing manufacturers make improvements, especially tightening up aim at the factory. Headlights shouldn’t just be about what looks cool. They’re important safety equipment. When they perform well, they can help drivers spot trouble sooner and avoid a crash.”
Apart from the IIHS, the Model 3 is also gaining accolades from other safety organizations. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), for one, has given the Model 3 a flawless 5-Star Safety Rating. The organization tested the Model 3 on frontal crash, side crash, and rollover safety; and in all categories and subcategories, the electric car displayed a level of industry-leading driver and passenger safety. As highlighted by Tesla in a following blog post, the scores of the Model 3 from the NHTSA’s tests place the electric car as the vehicle with the “lowest probability of injury” among all cars tested by the NHTSA to date.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX’s biggest earnings test yet lands Tuesday, and Tesla shareholders should be watching
SpaceX reports earnings Tuesday as Wall Street watches AI spending, Starlink growth and Tesla merger
SpaceX reports third quarter results after the market closes Tuesday, with a webcast at 4:30 p.m. ET streamed on X, and Tesla follows a day later. Bloomberg consensus, cited by Pepperstone, calls for revenue of $12.89 billion, adjusted EBITDA of $6.62 billion and adjusted EPS near $0.15. That would be about 65% growth from the second quarter and SpaceX’s first profitable quarter since its IPO. Analysts expect roughly $6.4 billion from AI and $4.9 billion from Starlink, which is projected to reach 14.3 million consumer subscribers. Capital spending is forecast at $19.6 billion, leaving free cash flow near negative $11.6 billion.
The numbers matter because SpaceX has spent months trying to win over a skeptical market. It priced its record IPO at $135, spiked to $225.64, then sank near $105 in early August. Friday’s close of $146.03 sits about 28% below the June high. The Q2 report beat on revenue at $7.8 billion and put Starlink at 12 million subscribers, but $18.4 billion of capex hurt the stock. Since then SpaceX reached orbit on Starship Flight 14 with 26 Starlink V3 satellites, agreed to buy 800 MHz spectrum for about $8 billion as part of its Starlink Mobile push, and signed a fourth compute hosting deal in four months worth roughly $13 billion a year from December. Management is targeting more than 2 gigawatts of compute by year end and a $100 billion annualized revenue run rate. Evercore ISI, which raised its target to $275, said the quarter may be judged more on those targets than the reported figures
All of this sits under the Tesla merger question. Barclays analyst Dan Levy expects an all stock deal in which SpaceX buys Tesla at a premium, using reference values of $2.1 trillion and $1.5 trillion, and said an announcement would need to come by late October or early November to be voted on at Tesla’s December 6 annual meeting. Barclays estimates Musk would hold about 37% of the combined company and 56% of the votes. Musk said in July that combining companies cannot be discussed on an earnings call, but an investor question asking when SpaceX will merge with Tesla is sitting on SpaceX’s Q&A platform, and Teslarati has tracked how the Roadster demo revived the talk.
If a deal happens, Tuesday’s result would effectively set the price Tesla holders would receive. Their shares would convert into SpaceX stock, along with exposure to a company with a heavy investment on AI, while Tesla itself expects 2026 capex above $25 billion. A strong quarter and calmer spending would make that exchange easier to sell. Another round of heavy capex and a falling stock would make it harder.
Investor's Corner
Tesla’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
Analysts say the Roadster demo puts a Tesla and SpaceX merger back on the table.
The Roadster unveiling near Waco ended Thursday night, and by Friday morning much of the investor reaction had less to do with the car than with who owns the rocket technology inside it.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said the event “puts the Tesla/SpaceX relationship on the table in a tangible way,” pointing to the propulsion, pressure vessel and control hardware sitting on a Tesla product. Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management called the demo “a ridiculous display of engineering” with “no commercial value” beyond embarrassing traditional automakers, though he said it showed Musk wants the two companies together.
The more specific forecast came a day earlier from Barclays. Analyst Dan Levy told clients a deal could be announced before Tesla’s annual meeting, which must happen by December 6, and that an announcement in late October or early November could make shareholder approval harder. Barclays expects SpaceX to be the buyer in an all stock deal, with Tesla holders receiving SpaceX shares at a premium, based on market values of roughly $2.1 trillion for SpaceX and $1.5 trillion for Tesla. If nothing lands around the meeting, the bank still sees an announcement within 6 to 12 months.
The Roadster demo just added more weight to merger speculations. Tesla’s demo used cold gas thrusters and pressure tanks of the kind SpaceX uses on Falcon 9, and Musk described the car as a collaboration between Tesla and SpaceX engineers, as we mentioned in our breakdown of the three Roadster configurations.
Musk has not publicly addressed a deal since the event, as far as we have seen. His most direct answer remains the one he gave at the All In Summit, when he said that with so much collaboration, “who can imagine what action one might take” without ruling anything out. Ives has held to a 2027 timeline since his March note, and Musk pushed back on the China piece of the speculation when ARK floated a year end announcement in August.
The next test is Tesla’s third quarter earnings call on October 21. However, we recall in July that Musk told analysts, “we can’t talk about combining companies and that kind of thing on an earnings call,” so a clear answer wouldn’t be expected.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones
Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.
Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”
He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”
Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.
Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 14, 2026
The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”
That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.
While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.
The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.