Tesla was found to be one of the most unreliable brands in America, according to Consumer Reports’ annual reliability report.
Consumer Reports‘ annual reliability rankings have been released, and with data from 24 brands and over 300,000 vehicles, Tesla fell near the bottom (19/24) along with Mercedes-Benz, Jeep, Volkswagen, GMC, and Chevrolet. Electric vehicles overall also placed poorly, being the second least reliable category of vehicles. Hybrids/plugin hybrids, especially those from Toyota, were found to be the most reliable.
Before diving deeper into the rankings, it is crucial to understand how Consumer Reports creates its yearly reliability rankings in the first place. This year, the company surveyed over 300,000 vehicles (sold between 2000-2022), and over the past year, owners were asked to report issues they had with their vehicles. Issues were categorized into 17 categories; engine issues, transmission issues, interior electronics issues, etc. From this accumulation of data, Consumer Reports then gives each brand a grade out of 100 regarding their overall reliability.
Consumer Reports also stipulates that they will only rank brands that they have “sufficient survey data for two or more models.” Hence the absence of brands such as Rivian, Alfa Romeo, and Lucid.
Tesla scored a reliability score of 40/100, while electric vehicles overall scored 36/100. It isn’t all bad news for Tesla; its score matches the average for domestic automakers, the company was able to improve its ranking by four places compared to last year, and none of its vehicles made it to the list of 10 least reliable vehicles in America. A list that notably included the popular Hyundai Kona EV scoring 5/100.
Conversely, hybrid and PHEV vehicles crushed the competition with an average score of 78/100. And unsurprisingly, the brand with the most extensive representation within that segment, Toyota, achieved the number 1 spot with an overall reliability score of 72/100. Toyota was joined by Lexus, BMW, Mazda, and Honda in the top 5 (descending order).
Consumer Reports’ results lead to one central question, what influenced Tesla (and electric vehicles generally) in scoring so low compared to the competition? This question becomes especially confounding when the prevailing narrative is that “electric vehicles are generally more reliable than their gas counterparts.”
Consumer Reports’ analysis only addresses this question once, noting that “As more EVs hit the marketplace and automakers build each model in greater numbers, we are seeing that some of them have problems with the battery packs, charging systems, and the motors in their drive systems. Owners of the Chevrolet Bolt, Ford Mustang Mach-E, Hyundai Kona Electric, and Volkswagen ID.4 all reported some of these issues.”
Another couple of issues that may be plaguing Tesla include build quality and software problems. Tesla has notoriously had quality control issues, which will certainly not aid its reliability score. At the same time, as Tesla attempts to offer the bleeding edge of software innovation, they undoubtedly encounter more software issues than have been typically seen in the automotive space. And while these problems are typically fixed through updates and technical support quickly, they could easily contribute to Tesla’s poor performance.
Looking to the future, it is clear that Tesla needs to continue to dedicate itself to improving QC and general reliability. It is easy to say, “Tesla needs to increase production,” but consumers will pay the price if this production expansion comes at the cost of reliability.
What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!
Investor's Corner
BNP Paribas Exane initiates Tesla coverage with “Underperform” rating
The firm’s projections for Tesla still include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has received a bearish call from BNP Paribas Exane, which initiated coverage on the stock with an Underperform rating and a $307 price target, about 30% below current levels.
The firm’s analysts argued that Tesla’s valuation is driven heavily by artificial intelligence ventures such as the Robotaxi and Optimus, which are both still not producing any sales today.
Tesla’s valuation
In its note, BNP Paribas Exane stated that Tesla’s two AI-led programs, the Robotaxi and Optimus robots, generate “zero sales today, yet inform ~75% of our ~$1.02 trillion price target.” The research firm’s model projected a maximum bull-case valuation of $2.7 trillion through 2040, but after discounting milestone probabilities, its base-case valuation remained at $1.02 trillion.
The analysts described their outlook as optimistic toward Tesla’s AI ventures but cautioned that the stock’s “unfavorable risk/reward is clear,” adding that consensus earnings expectations for 2026 remain too high. Tesla’s market cap currently stands around $1.44 trillion with a trailing twelve-month revenue of $92.7 billion, which BNP Paribas argued does not justify Tesla’s P/E ratio of 258.59, as noted in an Investing.com report.
Tesla and its peers
BNP Paribas Exane’s report also included a comparative study of the “Magnificent Seven,” finding Tesla’s current market valuation as rather aggressive. “Our unique comparative analysis of the ‘Mag 7’ reveals the extreme nature of TSLA’s valuation, as the market implicitly says TSLA’s 2035 earnings (~55% of which will be driven by Robotaxi & Optimus, w/ zero sales now) have the same level of risk & value-appropriation as the ‘Mag 6’s’ 2026 earnings,” the firm noted.
The firm’s projections for Tesla include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030, 17 million cumulative Optimus robot deliveries by 2040 priced above $20,000 each, and more than 11 million Full Self-Driving subscriptions by 2030. Interestingly enough, these seem to be rather optimistic projections for one of the electric vehicle maker’s more bearish estimates today.
News
Tesla FSD’s new Mad Max mode is getting rave reviews from users
It does appear that Mad Max mode is destined to be one of the system’s biggest steps forward to date.
Tesla’s release notes for the newly released Mad Max mode for FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 simply stated that the feature “comes with higher speeds and more frequent lane changes than Hurry.” But as per videos that have been posted online by FSD users who have tested the system, it does appear that Mad Max mode is destined to be one of the system’s biggest steps forward to date.
It is then no surprise that the new capability is getting rave reviews from Tesla owners.
Impressive tests
A look at posts on social media platform X would show that, similar to past FSD releases, numerous Tesla content creators immediately tested Mad Max mode on real-world streets after it was downloaded onto their vehicle. Considering that the update was released rather late, the first tests of Mad Max mode were done at night. Despite this, it was evident that Tesla worked very hard to make Mad Max mode into something that is very useful in real-world scenarios.
This could be seen in videos from longtime Tesla owner @BLKMDL3, who observed that Max Max mode was “amazing” and like “perfect for LA traffic” due to its cautious but assertive nature. Later on, the Tesla owner noted that after eight drives, it was evident that FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 was impressive.
Assertive but safe
Other testers such as Model Y owner Sawyer Merritt noted that Mad Max mode drives very quickly and confidently, with smoother acceleration that is still very safe. These were echoed by another longtime FSD tester, Dirty Tesla, who noted that Mad Max mode seems to be designed for heavy, aggressive traffic so users could fit in better. The FSD user did, however, observe that Mad Max mode does speed up a lot on open roads.
Recent comments from Tesla AI Head Ashok Elluswamy have indicated that Mad Max mode was created to be a solution for daytime congested traffic, which is arguably one of the most soul-crushing experiences that drivers deal with on a daily basis. With this in mind, it does appear that FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 could prove to be a notable step forward in Tesla’s push towards true autonomous driving.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk highlights the biggest flaw in X’s monetization program
Elon Musk also stated that YouTube manages creator payments “much better.”
Elon Musk has admitted that X’s creator payout system isn’t living up to expectations, and he has highlighted the current system’s biggest flaw.
Amidst complaints about low and inconsistent payments, the platform’s owner acknowledged that X has been “underpaying and not allocating payment accurately enough.” Musk also stated that YouTube manages creator payments “much better.”
Musk acknowledges payout issues
Recent discussions about the social media platform’s payout issues began when X product head Nikita Bier stated that the company was developing new upgrades for “power users.” This prompted X user Peter Duan to raise ongoing concerns about being “consistently underpaid” compared to his peers. Bier responded candidly, suggesting that “creator payouts do more harm than good and we need to off-ramp to a different system.”
Musk then weighed in on the matter, contradicting Bier’s view. “No,” Musk wrote in his reply, “the issue is that we are underpaying and not allocating payment accurately enough. YouTube does a much better job.” The Tesla CEO’s comment immediately reignited debates about X’s monetization program, which some have criticized for its rather unpredictable nature.
X’s monetization challenges
Since X launched its ad revenue-sharing program in 2023, the system has promised to reward Premium subscribers who generate high engagement with verified accounts, as noted in a WION report. Creators, however, have argued that the company’s payout model has remained inconsistent, with revenue fluctuating even when view counts stay stable. Reports have noted that some users with millions of monthly impressions have received just a few hundred dollars.
By contrast, YouTube’s Partner Program, which takes a 45% cut of ad revenue, is known for more transparent and predictable payments. Musk’s admission that YouTube handles monetization more effectively could then hint at a potential shift towards a new monetization program for X, a platform that has become increasingly critical to social conversations over the years.
BNP Paribas Exane initiates Tesla coverage with “Underperform” rating
Tesla FSD’s new Mad Max mode is getting rave reviews from users
Elon Musk highlights the biggest flaw in X’s monetization program
-
News3 hours agoTesla exec hints at FSD Mad Max mode’s killer feature
-
Elon Musk1 day agoStarship’s next chapter: SpaceX eyes tower catch after flawless Flight 11
-
News1 day agoTesla reportedly places large order for robot parts, hinting that Optimus V3 design is all but finalized
-
News13 hours agoTesla launches ‘Mad Max’ Full Self-Driving Speed Profile, its fastest yet
-
News3 days agoTesla Autopilot visualization gets big upgrade with tons of new additions
-
News21 hours agoTesla makes big move with its Insurance program
-
Investor's Corner7 hours agoTesla’s comfort level taking risks makes the stock a ‘must own,’ firm says
-
News14 hours agoTesla just teased something crazy with the next Full Self-Driving update