News
Electrify America edges out Tesla Superchargers in 2021 EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark
Last year, global engineering firm umlaut, which performs benchmarks in various industries, adapted its testing prowess to the United States’ electric vehicle market to determine which public charging network was the best in the country. The effort, which was dubbed as the inaugural 2020 USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark, determined that Electrify America was by far the best public charging network in the United States.
But while the inaugural USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark was notable, there was a popular network that was not included in umlaut’s first analysis: the ubiquitous Tesla Supercharger Network, which is very prevalent but not open to the public like Electrify America. This was why in this year’s USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark, the global engineering firm made it a point to include the Supercharger Network in its study, even if the system had to be scored quite differently due to it being specifically designed for Tesla’s electric cars.

For the 2021 USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark, umlaut performed a comparative study of the country’s fast-charging networks and rated each one using several criteria, specifically: interoperability, pricing, transparency, functionality, and availability, among others. A Tesla Model 3 and a Ford Mustang Mach-E were selected as the vehicles that would used for the study. The EV pair covered 2,100 miles over six days to test charging stations across Michigan, Ohio, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.
To rank the different charging networks, umlaut opted to split its analysis into two areas: the “Digital Platform,” which includes a service’s website and mobile app, and the “Charging Location,” which includes ease of payment, amenities, and the technical performance of the system itself. The results, interestingly enough, revealed that Electrify America was still the overall winner with 702 points due to its balanced scores in the “Digital Platform” and “Charging Location” categories.

Tesla’s Supercharger Network was a second with an overall score of 649. This was quite interesting as Superchargers completely dominated the “Charging Location” metric, earning a perfect score in “Technical Performance” and high scores in the “Access and Payment” subcategories, among others. However, the Supercharger Network lost points in the “Digital Platform” category since Tesla’s website and mobile app were not as useful as those of other networks. This was, of course, partly due to the fact that Tesla’s Supercharger sessions were already integrated into the company’s vehicles themselves.
Despite the challenges presented by the Supercharger Network in this year’s 2021 USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark, umlaut’s Christian Sussbauer noted that Tesla’s charging systems excel in numerous key areas.

“We had a lot of internal discussions about including Tesla Superchargers in this year’s Benchmark because we really want to create a testing system that will capture the right metrics and provide the most useful information to the EV industry. To be honest, if you asked me before we conducted the tests, I think I would have predicted that Tesla Superchargers would end up leading in total points because it’s well known that they do a great job in many aspects of fast charging. And actually, our test results show this clearly—Superchargers excel in many important areas. It’s actually a little boring to test Supercharger stations because you just plug them in, and they reliably work.”
“We were happy to find a very high level of simplicity and reliability with Electrify America this year as well. Using an EV with Plug & Charge enabled on Electrify America’s network was a very good user experience. All of the EV industry should strive to replicate that aspect of Superchargers and Electrify America/Plug & Charge. And in the end, Electrify America also has a very useful smartphone app and website that combined to put them over the top in terms of total points scored for the metrics we were measuring in 2021,” Sussbauer said.
Watch a video about the 2021 USA EV Charging Infrastructure Benchmark below.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
