Compare the2025 Mazda CX-50VS 2024 Volvo XC60

In the past twenty years hundreds of infants and young children have died after being left in vehicles, usually by accident. When turning the vehicle off, drivers of the CX-50 are reminded to check the back seat if they opened the rear door before starting out. The XC60 doesn’t offer a back seat reminder.

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 XC60 doesn’t offer a front passenger side knee airbag.

Both the CX-50 and the XC60 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 XC60:

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 XC60 was last only a “Top Safety Pick” in 2023 but no longer qualifies.

Mazda’s powertrain warranty covers the CX-50 1 year and 10,000 miles longer than Volvo covers the XC60. Any repair needed on the engine, transmission, axles, joints or driveshafts is fully covered for 5 years or 60,000 miles. Coverage on the XC60 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 32 points higher than the Volvo XC60 and 44 points higher than the Volvo XC60 T8.

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.

As tested in Motor Trend the Mazda CX-50 turbo 4 cyl. is faster than the XC60 B5 2.0 turbo 4-cylinder:

On the EPA test cycle the CX-50 gets better mileage than the XC60 running its gasoline engine:

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 XC60 doesn’t offer a system that can shut down part of the engine.

Both the CX-50 Turbo/Hybrid and the XC60 have a standard automatic start/stop engine feature to stop unnecessary fuel waste and pollution at stoplights and heavy traffic. All CX-50 Turbo/Hybrids have a standard disable switch for the system, so a driver can keep the engine from shutting off when the vehicle stops temporarily. The XC60 T8 doesn’t offer a way to disable start/stop.

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 XC60 requires premium, which can cost on average about 84.9 cents more per gallon.

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 XC60 doesn’t offer a CVT.

The CX-50 stops much shorter than the XC60:

The front and rear suspension of the CX-50 uses coil springs for better ride, handling and control than the XC60, which uses transverse leafs springs in the rear. Coil springs compress more progressively and offer more suspension travel for a smoother ride with less bottoming out.

The CX-50 handles at .87 G’s, while the XC60 Recharge Polestar Engineered pulls only .86 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 quicker than the XC60 B5 Core (26.8 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 27.3 seconds @ .62 average G’s).

For better maneuverability, the CX-50 Hybrid’s turning circle is 2 feet tighter than the XC60’s (35.4 feet vs. 37.4 feet). The CX-50’s turning circle is 1.4 feet tighter than the XC60’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 XC60 (8.6 vs. 8.5 inches), allowing the CX-50 to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged.

The Mazda CX-50 may be more efficient, handle and accelerate better because it weighs about 400 to 750 pounds less than the Volvo XC60.

The CX-50 is 5.8 inches narrower than the XC60, making the CX-50 easier to handle and maneuver in traffic.

The CX-50 has 1.1 inches more front headroom, .2 inches more front legroom, .6 inches more rear headroom and 1.8 inches more rear legroom than the XC60.

The CX-50 has a much larger cargo volume than the XC60 with its rear seat up (31.4 vs. 24.4 cubic feet).

The CX-50’s cargo area is larger than the XC60’s in almost every dimension:

Pulling a handle automatically lowers the CX-50’s rear seats, to make changing between passengers and cargo easier. The XC60 doesn’t offer automatic folding seats.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducts detailed tests on headlights for their range both straight ahead and in curves and to be certain they don’t exceed acceptable amounts of glare to oncoming drivers. The CX-50’s headlights were rated “Good” to “Acceptable” by the IIHS, while the XC60’s headlights are rated “Acceptable.”

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 XC60 doesn’t offer extendable visors.

Insurance will cost less for the CX-50 owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the CX-50 will cost $1080 less than the XC60 over a five-year period.

The CX-50 will cost the buyer less in the long run because of its superior resale value. The IntelliChoice estimates that the CX-50 will retain 53.88% to 56.04% of its original price after five years, while the XC60 only retains 47.41% to 49.36%.

IntelliChoice estimates that five-year ownership costs (depreciation, financing, insurance, fuel, fees, repairs and maintenance) for the Mazda CX-50 will be $16116 to $24102 less than for the Volvo XC60.

Consumer Reports® recommends the Mazda CX-50, based on reliability, safety and performance. The Volvo XC60 isn't recommended.

The Mazda CX-50 outsold the Volvo XC60 by 12% during 2023.