On paper the Toyota looks like the efficient one: 28.0 kWh per 100 miles against the Hyundai’s 30.0, and 5.1 seconds to 100 km/h against 7.5 from an all-wheel-drive powertrain. In observed driving the picture inverts. The bZ4X AWD manages 375 km against the Ioniq 5’s 450, keeps 73 per cent of its WLTP figure against 79, and takes 28 minutes to charge from 10 to 80 per cent against 18.
What actually differs
- Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD goes 75 km further on the observed real-world figure than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- On the EPA highway cycle – the one that decides a long drive – Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD is rated 21 km further than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD is 3% more efficient than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh, which is what the electricity bill follows.
- Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD charges from 10 to 80 per cent 10 minutes faster than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD carries 11 kWh more usable battery than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD has 2 more years of battery warranty than the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh.
- Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh is 2 seconds quicker to 100 km/h than the Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD.
Every line above is computed from the table below, not written: a difference is only stated where both cars carry that figure from a named source.
| Specification | Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh Toyota | Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD Hyundai |
|---|---|---|
| Market & identity | ||
| Curb weight | 4,619 lb | 4,542 lb |
| Battery | ||
| Cell chemistry LFP tolerates daily charging to 100% and is the most thermally stable; NMC and NCA pack more energy per kilogram. | NMC | NMC |
| Usable capacity The figure every range and cost calculation on this site is based on. | 69.0 kWh | 80.0 kWh |
| Thermal management Active liquid or direct-refrigerant cooling is the strongest single predictor of slow degradation and repeatable fast charging. | liquid-active | liquid-active |
| Pack voltage 800 V architectures hold high charging power for longer and waste less energy as heat. | 385 V | 697 V |
| Capacity loss per year Rate for this vehicle class from published fleet datasets, not a measurement of this model and not a manufacturer claim. | 2.7% / year est | 2.7% / year est |
| Projected state of health at 8 years Modelled from the observed degradation rate at average annual mileage. An estimate, not a measurement. | 78% est | 78% est |
| Range & efficiency | ||
| EPA range US EPA combined cycle, the most conservative of the three official tests. | 288 mi | 318 mi |
| EPA range, city The city half of the EPA combined rating. Usually the higher of the two for an electric car. | 311 mi | 356 mi |
| EPA range, highway The highway half of the EPA combined rating, and the figure to plan a long drive around. | 259 mi | 272 mi |
| WLTP range European combined cycle, typically 15 to 25 percent more optimistic than EPA for the same car. | 321 mi | 354 mi |
| Observed real-world range Mixed-conditions figure from independent testing. This is the number that matters on a road trip. | 233 mi | 280 mi |
| EPA consumption | 28.0 kWh/100 mi | 30.0 kWh/100 mi |
| Real-world consumption | 296 Wh/mi | 286 Wh/mi |
| Charging | ||
| Peak DC power Held briefly, often only inside a narrow state-of-charge window. | 150 kW | 263 kW |
| 10 to 80 percent DC charge time The honest measure of fast-charging speed. | 28 min | 18 min |
| AC onboard charger Sets how fast the car fills up overnight at home. | 11 kW | 11 kW |
| DC connector (Europe) | CCS2 | CCS2 |
| DC connector (US) The plug fitted to the car as sold in the United States. Blank where we have not sourced it for that market. | NACS | NACS |
| Performance | ||
| Peak power | 252 kW | 168 kW |
| 0-60 mph | — | — |
| 0-100 km/h | 5.1 s | 7.5 s |
| Cost of ownership | ||
| Base MSRP (US) | — | $37,500 |
| Base price (EU) | €50,990 | €51,650 |
| Est. out-of-warranty pack replacement (US) | — | — |
| Battery warranty | 8 yr | 10 yr |
| Est. 5-year residual value | — | — |
| Safety & risk | ||
| NHTSA overall rating | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| Euro NCAP overall rating | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| Battery or high-voltage recalls | 0 | 10 |
| Battery safety score | ||
| Composite score Our own composite of thermal management, cell chemistry, crash rating and recall record. Formula | 9 / 10 | 6.5 / 10 |
highlighted marks the better figure for that row. Where a car is not sold in a market, its price and official range for that market are blank rather than converted. est marks a modelled value, explained on the methodology page.
Two different trims, and it matters
These are not like-for-like drivetrains. The Toyota here is the 73.1 kWh all-wheel-drive bZ4X, with 252 kW across two motors; the Hyundai is the 84 kWh rear-drive Ioniq 5, with 168 kW through one. That is why the Toyota is 2.4 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and why it is the heavier car for its battery size. Comparing the AWD Toyota against the RWD Hyundai is the comparison most shoppers in this class are actually making, but it is worth naming, because it explains half of what follows.
The efficient car with the shorter range
The bZ4X uses less energy per mile on both official tests — 28.0 kWh per 100 miles EPA against 30.0 — and still goes less far, because it carries 69 kWh usable against 80. On the EPA test that is 288 miles against 318. In observed mixed driving the gap widens sharply: 375 km against 450, a difference of 75 km rather than the 54 km the WLTP figures would predict.
That widening is the more interesting number. The Toyota returns 73 per cent of its WLTP range in observed driving; the Hyundai returns 79 per cent. Across the eighteen cars on this site the average is 79 per cent, so the Ioniq 5 is ordinary and the bZ4X falls further short than almost anything else here — the full ranking is in claimed against real range. If you plan journeys off the official figure, the two cars do not deserve the same margin of safety.
Energy costs follow the efficiency, not the range: $5.15 per 100 miles for the Toyota against $5.52 for the Hyundai at the US average home rate, or $58 a month against $62. A full charge is $14.11 against $16.36, and the Toyota needs more of them.
18 minutes against 28
This is the clearest gap on the page. The Ioniq 5 runs an 800-volt pack and peaks at 263 kW; the bZ4X is 400-volt and peaks at 150. From 10 to 80 per cent that is 18 minutes against 28. In miles rather than minutes, the Hyundai takes on about 223 miles in its 18 minutes — 12.4 miles for every minute plugged in — against 202 miles in 28 for the Toyota, 7.2 a minute. On a long drive the Hyundai gives back most of an hour every 600 miles.
The catch is the station. The Ioniq 5 needs a 350 kW post to hit 18 minutes; on a 150 kW one it takes about 22, which is still six minutes ahead. The bZ4X is at its ceiling on a 150 kW post and gains nothing from anything larger — the same is true of nine of the fourteen US-rated cars here.
Price says different things in different markets
In the UK the Hyundai is £9,110 cheaper: £43,400 against £52,510. In Europe the order reverses and the margin collapses: €50,990 for the Toyota against €51,650 for the Hyundai, €660 apart. This is not a rounding error in our data, it is how these two are positioned in the two markets, and it is the reason this site never converts one market’s price into another. If you are shopping in the UK the price argument is one-sided; in Europe there is no price argument at all.
Vehicle-to-load, recalls and ratings
Both can run mains appliances from the pack, but not equally: 3.6 kW from the Ioniq 5 against 1.5 kW from the bZ4X. The first will run a fridge, a kettle and power tools at a campsite; the second will run a laptop and a light. The full list is in electric cars with vehicle-to-load.
Both hold five stars from NHTSA and five from Euro NCAP. On recalls our record shows none for the bZ4X and ten for the Ioniq 5, which is what separates our battery safety composite — 9 against 6.5. That composite is our own, its formula is published on the methodology page, and it is not a crash rating: on crash testing these two are level.
Frequently asked questions
Which is more efficient, the bZ4X or the Ioniq 5?
The bZ4X, on both official tests: 28.0 kWh per 100 miles EPA against 30.0, and $58 a month against $62 at average US mileage. It still has the shorter range, because its battery is 11 kWh smaller.
How much faster does the Ioniq 5 charge?
Ten minutes faster from 10 to 80 per cent — 18 against 28 — and it puts in more range while doing it: about 223 miles against 202. Per minute plugged in that is 12.4 miles against 7.2.
Which is cheaper to buy?
It depends on the market. In the UK the Ioniq 5 is £9,110 cheaper; in Europe the bZ4X is €660 cheaper, which is close enough to call level. We do not hold a US price for either car from a source we can credit.
Sources
Every figure above is credited on the two car pages: the Toyota bZ4X AWD 73.1 kWh and the Hyundai Ioniq 5 84 kWh RWD, each with the source and the date it was read. Running costs use the standing assumptions on the methodology page: $0.184 per kWh at home and 1,125 miles a month.