Compare the2025 Mazda CX-50VS 2024 Volvo XC40

The Mazda CX-50 has standard driver and front passenger side knee airbags mounted low on the dashboard. These airbags helps prevent the driver and front passenger from sliding under their seatbelts or the main frontal airbags; this keeps them better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. Knee airbags also help keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The XC40 doesn’t offer a front passenger side knee airbag.

Both the CX-50 and the XC40 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, driver knee airbags, side-impact head airbags, front and rear seatbelt pretensioners, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, all wheel drive, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, post-collision automatic braking systems, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, blind spot warning systems, rearview cameras, rear cross-path warning, driver alert monitors and available around view monitors.

Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4180-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Mazda CX-50 is safer than the XC40:

The Mazda CX-50 has achieved the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s (IIHS) highest rating of “Top Safety Pick Plus” for the 2024 model year. This distinction is based on its exceptional performance in IIHS’ rigorous battery of safety tests. Specifically, it earned a “Good” rating in the latest, more stringent moderate overlap front crash test, a “Good” result in the updated side impact test, and an “Acceptable” score in the revised pedestrian crash prevention test. The XC40 is not even a standard “Top Safety Pick” for 2024.

Mazda’s powertrain warranty covers the CX-50 1 year and 10,000 miles longer than Volvo covers the XC40. Any repair needed on the engine, transmission, axles, joints or driveshafts is fully covered for 5 years or 60,000 miles. Coverage on the XC40 ends after only 4 years or 50,000 miles.

There are almost 2 times as many Mazda dealers as there are Volvo dealers, which makes it much easier should you ever need service under the CX-50’s warranty.

A reliable vehicle saves its owner time, money and trouble. Nobody wants to be stranded or have to be without a vehicle while it’s being repaired. Consumer Reports rates the CX-50’s reliability 19 points higher than the XC40.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2024 Initial Quality Study of new car owners surveyed provide the statistics that show that Mazda vehicles are better in initial quality than Volvo vehicles. With 10 fewer problems per 100 vehicles, JD Power ranks Mazda higher than Volvo.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2024 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Volvo vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Mazda above average in long-term dependability. With 5 more problems per 100 vehicles in the first three years of ownership, Volvo is rated below average.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ January 2024 Auto Issue reports that Mazda vehicles are more reliable than Volvo vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Mazda 18 places higher in reliability than Volvo.

The CX-50’s optional 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder produces 9 more horsepower (256 vs. 247) and 62 lbs.-ft. more torque (320 vs. 258) than the XC40’s 2.0 turbo 4-cylinder hybrid.

On the EPA test cycle the CX-50 gets better mileage than the XC40:

An engine control system that can shut down some of the engine’s cylinders helps improve the CX-50 (except Turbo/Hybrid)’s fuel efficiency. The XC40 doesn’t offer a system that can shut down part of the engine.

To lower fuel costs and make buying fuel easier, the Mazda CX-50 uses regular unleaded gasoline (premium recommended with the 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder engine for maximum performance). The XC40 requires premium, which can cost on average about 84.9 cents more per gallon.

The CX-50’s standard fuel tank has 1.7 gallons more fuel capacity than the XC40 (15.9 vs. 14.2 gallons).

The CX-50 has a standard continuously variable transmission (CVT). With no “steps” between gears, it can keep the engine at the most efficient speed for fuel economy, or keep it at its peak horsepower indefinitely for maximum acceleration. The XC40 doesn’t offer a CVT.

The CX-50 stops much shorter than the XC40:

For a smoother ride and more stable handling, the CX-50’s wheelbase is 4.4 inches longer than on the XC40 (110.8 inches vs. 106.4 inches).

For better handling and stability, the average track (width between the wheels) on the CX-50 is 2.1 inches wider in the front and 1.3 inches wider in the rear than the track on the XC40.

The CX-50 handles at .87 G’s, while the XC40 B5 Ultimate pulls only .85 G’s of cornering force in a Car and Driver skidpad test.

The CX-50 2.5 Turbo Premium Plus executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver 1.3 seconds quicker than the XC40 B5 Plus (26.8 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 28.1 seconds @ .61 average G’s).

For better maneuverability, the CX-50 Hybrid’s turning circle is 2 feet tighter than the XC40’s (35.4 feet vs. 37.4 feet). The CX-50’s turning circle is 1.4 feet tighter than the XC40’s (36 feet vs. 37.4 feet).

For greater off-road capability the CX-50 2.5 S Premium Plus has a greater minimum ground clearance than the XC40 (8.6 vs. 8.1 inches), allowing the CX-50 to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged.

The CX-50 has 2.3 cubic feet more passenger volume than the XC40 (100.3 vs. 98).

The CX-50 has .1 inches more front headroom, .8 inches more front legroom and 3.7 inches more rear legroom than the XC40.

The CX-50 has a much larger cargo volume than the XC40 with its rear seat up (31.4 vs. 20.4 cubic feet).

A low lift-over cargo hatch design makes loading and unloading the CX-50 easier. The CX-50’s cargo hatch lift-over height is 28.4 inches, while the XC40’s liftover is 29.7 inches.

The CX-50’s cargo area is larger than the XC40’s in every dimension:

The CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo Premium has a standard heads-up display that projects speed, warning and navigation instruction readouts in front of the driver’s line of sight, allowing drivers to view information without diverting their eyes from the road. The XC40 doesn’t offer a heads-up display.

The CX-50’s standard Advanced Keyless Entry and Start allow you to unlock the doors from either front door handle, open the cargo door, and start the engine, all without removing the key from the pocket or purse. Keyless Drive standard on the XC40 only offers hands-free access for the ignition, none to unlock the vehicle.

To shield the driver and front passenger’s vision over a larger portion of the windshield and side windows, the CX-50 has standard extendable sun visors. The XC40 doesn’t offer extendable visors.

Standard air-conditioned seats in the CX-50 Premium Plus/Turbo keep the driver and front passenger comfortable and take the sting out of hot seats in Summer. The XC40 doesn’t offer air-conditioned seats.

IntelliChoice estimates that five-year ownership costs (depreciation, financing, insurance, fuel, fees, repairs and maintenance) for the Mazda CX-50 will be $4151 to $4953 less than for the Volvo XC40.

Consumer Reports® recommends the Mazda CX-50, based on reliability, safety and performance. The Volvo XC40 isn't recommended.

The Mazda CX-50 outsold the Volvo XC40 by 58% during 2023.