GMC Terrain vs Kia Sportage Insurance Cost
The GMC Terrain is cheaper to insure by about $135 a year for full coverage by our estimate ($1,480 vs. $1,615), and cheaper in 51 of 51 states.
Side-by-side insurance estimate
| Coverage | GMC Terrain | Kia Sportage | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| State minimum | $610 | $620 | −$10 |
| Standard (100/300/100) | $885 | $895 | −$10 |
| Full coverage | $1,480 | $1,615 | −$135 |
National average base rates, driver in their 30s with a clean record, latest model year of each car. Difference = Terrain minus Sportage.
Why one costs more to insure
| Factor | GMC Terrain | Kia Sportage |
|---|---|---|
| Segment | Small SUV | Small SUV |
| Powertrains | Gasoline, Diesel, Flex-fuel | Gasoline, Hybrid, Plug-in hybrid |
| HLDI collision (100 = avg) | 85 | 109 |
| HLDI comprehensive | 81 | 96 |
| HLDI property damage liability | 90 | 100 |
| HLDI bodily injury liability | 115 | 113 |
| NHTSA overall rating | — | 5★ |
| NICB most-stolen rank | Not in top 10 | Not in top 10 |
| Recalls (latest 3 model years) | 1 | 2 |
Collision losses are the biggest swing factor: the Kia Sportage has 24 points higher relative collision losses, meaning its crash repairs cost insurers more on average. Comprehensive losses (theft, weather, glass) also favor the GMC Terrain.
Terrain vs Sportage insurance by state
By driver profile (full coverage)
| Driver | Terrain | Sportage |
|---|---|---|
| Teen driver (18, own policy) | $4,070 | $4,445 |
| Young adult (22) | $2,370 | $2,585 |
| Adult in their 30s | $1,480 | $1,615 |
| Adult in their 50s | $1,360 | $1,485 |
| Senior (72) | $1,660 | $1,810 |
| 30s, one at-fault accident | $2,145 | $2,345 |
| 30s, DUI on record | $2,740 | $2,990 |
More comparisons
Frequently asked questions
Is the GMC Terrain or the Kia Sportage cheaper to insure?
By our estimate the GMC Terrain is cheaper, by about $135 a year for full coverage ($1,480 vs. $1,615) for a driver in their 30s with a clean record.
Why does insurance cost differ between the GMC Terrain and Kia Sportage?
Mostly because of insurance-loss history: HLDI collision indices of 85 vs. 109 and comprehensive indices of 81 vs. 96 (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.