Tesla Model X vs Toyota Sequoia Insurance Cost
The Toyota Sequoia is cheaper to insure by about $590 a year for full coverage by our estimate ($2,105 vs. $1,515), and cheaper in 51 of 51 states.
Side-by-side insurance estimate
| Coverage | Tesla Model X | Toyota Sequoia | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| State minimum | $590 | $510 | +$80 |
| Standard (100/300/100) | $860 | $740 | +$120 |
| Full coverage | $2,105 | $1,515 | +$590 |
National average base rates, driver in their 30s with a clean record, latest model year of each car. Difference = Model X minus Sequoia.
Why one costs more to insure
| Factor | Tesla Model X | Toyota Sequoia |
|---|---|---|
| Segment | Large SUV | Large SUV |
| Powertrains | Electric | Gasoline, Hybrid, Flex-fuel |
| HLDI collision (100 = avg) | 218 | 104 |
| HLDI comprehensive | 157 | 141 |
| HLDI property damage liability | 102 | 71 |
| HLDI bodily injury liability | 86 | 72 |
| NHTSA overall rating | — | — |
| NICB most-stolen rank | Not in top 10 | Not in top 10 |
| Recalls (latest 3 model years) | 8 | 6 |
Collision losses are the biggest swing factor: the Tesla Model X has 114 points higher relative collision losses, meaning its crash repairs cost insurers more on average. Comprehensive losses (theft, weather, glass) also favor the Toyota Sequoia.
Model X vs Sequoia insurance by state
By driver profile (full coverage)
| Driver | Model X | Sequoia |
|---|---|---|
| Teen driver (18, own policy) | $5,785 | $4,160 |
| Young adult (22) | $3,365 | $2,420 |
| Adult in their 30s | $2,105 | $1,515 |
| Adult in their 50s | $1,935 | $1,390 |
| Senior (72) | $2,355 | $1,695 |
| 30s, one at-fault accident | $3,050 | $2,195 |
| 30s, DUI on record | $3,895 | $2,800 |
More comparisons
Frequently asked questions
Is the Tesla Model X or the Toyota Sequoia cheaper to insure?
By our estimate the Toyota Sequoia is cheaper, by about $590 a year for full coverage ($2,105 vs. $1,515) for a driver in their 30s with a clean record.
Why does insurance cost differ between the Tesla Model X and Toyota Sequoia?
Mostly because of insurance-loss history: HLDI collision indices of 218 vs. 104 and comprehensive indices of 157 vs. 141 (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.