Mazda CX-5 vs Honda HR-V Insurance Cost
The Mazda CX-5 is cheaper to insure by about $140 a year for full coverage by our estimate ($1,325 vs. $1,465), and cheaper in 51 of 51 states.
Side-by-side insurance estimate
| Coverage | Mazda CX-5 | Honda HR-V | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| State minimum | $550 | $600 | −$50 |
| Standard (100/300/100) | $795 | $870 | −$75 |
| Full coverage | $1,325 | $1,465 | −$140 |
National average base rates, driver in their 30s with a clean record, latest model year of each car. Difference = CX-5 minus HR-V.
Why one costs more to insure
| Factor | Mazda CX-5 | Honda HR-V |
|---|---|---|
| Segment | Small SUV | Small SUV |
| Powertrains | Gasoline, Diesel | Gasoline |
| HLDI collision (100 = avg) | 80 | 85 |
| HLDI comprehensive | 71 | 81 |
| HLDI property damage liability | 96 | 96 |
| HLDI bodily injury liability | 79 | 107 |
| NHTSA overall rating | 5★ | 5★ |
| NICB most-stolen rank | Not in top 10 | Not in top 10 |
| Recalls (latest 3 model years) | 0 | 1 |
Collision losses are the biggest swing factor: the Honda HR-V has 5 points higher relative collision losses, meaning its crash repairs cost insurers more on average. Comprehensive losses (theft, weather, glass) also favor the Mazda CX-5.
CX-5 vs HR-V insurance by state
By driver profile (full coverage)
| Driver | CX-5 | HR-V |
|---|---|---|
| Teen driver (18, own policy) | $3,645 | $4,030 |
| Young adult (22) | $2,120 | $2,345 |
| Adult in their 30s | $1,325 | $1,465 |
| Adult in their 50s | $1,220 | $1,350 |
| Senior (72) | $1,485 | $1,640 |
| 30s, one at-fault accident | $1,920 | $2,125 |
| 30s, DUI on record | $2,450 | $2,710 |
More comparisons
Frequently asked questions
Is the Mazda CX-5 or the Honda HR-V cheaper to insure?
By our estimate the Mazda CX-5 is cheaper, by about $140 a year for full coverage ($1,325 vs. $1,465) for a driver in their 30s with a clean record.
Why does insurance cost differ between the Mazda CX-5 and Honda HR-V?
Mostly because of insurance-loss history: HLDI collision indices of 80 vs. 85 and comprehensive indices of 71 vs. 81 (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.