BMW X5 vs Jaguar F-Pace Insurance Cost
The BMW X5 is cheaper to insure by about $0 a year for full coverage by our estimate ($1,690 vs. $1,690), and cheaper in 21 of 51 states.
Side-by-side insurance estimate
| Coverage | BMW X5 | Jaguar F-Pace | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| State minimum | $545 | $540 | +$5 |
| Standard (100/300/100) | $790 | $785 | +$5 |
| Full coverage | $1,690 | $1,690 | — |
National average base rates, driver in their 30s with a clean record, latest model year of each car. Difference = X5 minus F-Pace.
Why one costs more to insure
| Factor | BMW X5 | Jaguar F-Pace |
|---|---|---|
| Segment | Luxury SUV | Luxury SUV |
| Powertrains | Gasoline, Hybrid, Plug-in hybrid, Diesel | Gasoline, Hybrid, Diesel |
| HLDI collision (100 = avg) | 120 | 137 |
| HLDI comprehensive | 142 | 132 |
| HLDI property damage liability | 86 | 83 |
| HLDI bodily injury liability | 81 | — |
| NHTSA overall rating | 4★ | — |
| NICB most-stolen rank | Not in top 10 | Not in top 10 |
| Recalls (latest 3 model years) | 7 | 5 |
Collision losses are the biggest swing factor: the Jaguar F-Pace has 17 points higher relative collision losses, meaning its crash repairs cost insurers more on average. Comprehensive losses (theft, weather, glass) also favor the Jaguar F-Pace.
X5 vs F-Pace insurance by state
By driver profile (full coverage)
| Driver | X5 | F-Pace |
|---|---|---|
| Teen driver (18, own policy) | $4,650 | $4,655 |
| Young adult (22) | $2,705 | $2,705 |
| Adult in their 30s | $1,690 | $1,690 |
| Adult in their 50s | $1,555 | $1,555 |
| Senior (72) | $1,895 | $1,895 |
| 30s, one at-fault accident | $2,450 | $2,455 |
| 30s, DUI on record | $3,130 | $3,130 |
More comparisons
Frequently asked questions
Is the BMW X5 or the Jaguar F-Pace cheaper to insure?
By our estimate the BMW X5 is cheaper, by about $0 a year for full coverage ($1,690 vs. $1,690) for a driver in their 30s with a clean record.
Why does insurance cost differ between the BMW X5 and Jaguar F-Pace?
Mostly because of insurance-loss history: HLDI collision indices of 120 vs. 137 and comprehensive indices of 142 vs. 132 (100 = average), plus repair costs, theft rates and segment.
How we estimate this
We start from the state's average liability, collision and comprehensive premiums published by the NAIC, then apply a location factor (population density and commute time from the Census ACS, weather hazard scores from FEMA's National Risk Index), a vehicle factor (HLDI insurance-loss data where available, otherwise vehicle segment), and a driver-profile multiplier. Results are rounded ranges for comparison, not quotes. Read the full methodology.