πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ This site covers US vehicles data and is intended for US audiences.

Chevrolet Trax vs Honda HR-V

Two subcompact SUVs compared on the numbers that matter β€” maintenance cost, reliability, and insurance.

Buy the Chevrolet Trax if its specific features or size suit your needs better.
Buy the Honda HR-V β€” lower 5-year cost and better reliability.

Maintenance and ownership cost

Chevrolet TraxHonda HR-V
Annual maintenance$488$301winner
5-year total cost$2,440$1,505winner
Reliability score8 / 1010 / 10winner
Major repair risk (5yr)12%5%winner
Cargo space54.1 cu ft55.1 cu ftwinner
Starting price (new)$23,000winner$28,600

Which is more reliable?

Chevrolet TraxHonda HR-V
RepairPal score8 / 1010 / 10winner
NHTSA complaints / 100k87.2winner151.7
Strongest years20222017, 2021
Weakest years2021, 2024, 20252022, 2023
Value retained Β· 3 yr78.8%87.1%winner
Value retained Β· 5 yr56.6%71.3%winner
Value retained Β· 7 yr44.6%60.5%winner

What breaks β€” and what it costs

Chevrolet TraxHonda HR-V
Engine31.9%12.4%winner
Electrical13.9%11.7%winner
ADAS7.4%winner8.6%
Brakes6.5%3.9%winner
Suspension6.2%β€”winner
Steering5.8%winner7.7%
Fuel systemβ€”winner6.3%
Tires/Wheels2.9%β€”winner
Glass/Windows3.2%winner23.4%
Airbags6.4%4.0%winner
Seatbeltβ€”winner0.8%

One major repair on either model can run $1,500–4,000. A warranty caps your exposure, especially on known problem years.

Which is cheaper to insure?

Chevrolet TraxHonda HR-V
Avg annual premium$2,013$2,005winner

Common questions

The Chevrolet Trax averages $488 a year in maintenance. That is $22 above the subcompact segment average of $466. Owners bring it in for unscheduled repairs an average of 0.18 times per year, below the subcompact segment at 0.2. Its reliability score is 8/10. Verdict: costlier than the segment, budget accordingly.
How we calculated this. Maintenance costs and reliability scores from RepairPal. Complaints and recalls from NHTSA. Fuel economy from the EPA. Insurance averages from CarEdge. Pricing from KBB. Depreciation from iSeeCars. Full methodology β†’