What's the Best SUV Under $40,000? We Tested 10 of Them

• We brought together 10 compact SUVs, drove them, and compared them to declare a winner.
• We tested how they drive, how spacious they are, their comfort levels, and more. 
• Here's how these 10 extremely popular cars stack up after weeks of real-world testing.

Compact SUVs are hot commodities, so we gathered 10 of them to figure out which one is the very best. Every single one of these crossovers has a starting price under $40,000, and most represent an excellent value, even if you spring for the priciest models. With each of these SUVs, we've evaluated how they drive, their onboard tech, passenger and cargo space, comfort and overall value. Then we gave them an Edmunds Rating to rank them from worst to best. If you're in the market for a compact SUV, look no further. 

10th place: Chevy Equinox

• Overall rating: 5.7 (out of 10) 
• Base price: $30,495
• As-tested price: $41,280
• Good: Great tech with generous trial period; spacious front and rear seating
• Bad: Slow on the road; not good to drive; poor access to the second row

The Chevy Equinox brings up the rear of this test, and for good reason, but there are still things to like. Its tech suite is one of the best of the bunch, with big, bright screens and graphics that are easy to read. You also get an eight-year trial of Google integration technology — a much longer trial period than what's offered by any of the competition. There's also good room in both the front and back rows, and the Equinox can be had in fun colors. 

But that's where the good news ends. On the road, the Chevy's ponderous handling and almost boat-like feel make it unpleasant to drive. We also don't like that there isn't much in the way of space for small items, and the rear hatch is nowhere near as large as the space in some of the competition. Subpar fuel economy and no hybrid option only make the Equinox look worse. 

9th place: Subaru Forester Hybrid

• Overall rating: 6.2 (out of 10)
• Base price: $31,445
• As-tested price: $40,830
• Good: Excellent visibility; easy to get in and out of
• Bad: Technology is behind the times; lack of small-item storage

The Subaru Forester Hybrid that we used for this test is a part of our One-Year Road Test fleet, where we live with a vehicle for a year and 20,000 miles. That means we know this particular vehicle especially well, for better and for worse.

The Forester Hybrid's visibility is phenomenal. Big windows and thin pillars eliminate blind spots, and they also let lots of light into the cabin, which makes it feel larger than it actually is. We also noted that the doors open very wide and the sills are thin, with a low hip point so children and those with limited mobility can get in and out easily. That makes fitting a car seat in the back a breeze as well.

However, the Forester's tech is a huge letdown. The Subie has a large vertically oriented 11.6-inch touchscreen, but the problem is that the infotainment software feels very dated. The maps are low-resolution and the menu structure is confusing. Thankfully, there is wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, but they don't take up the whole screen. This whole experience could be drastically improved, and it seems that it has been with the new setup that debuted in the 2026 Subaru Outback. And for a vehicle with such a rugged reputation, there's a disconcerting lack of small-item storage and small cupholders that didn't have a chance at fitting big water bottles.

8th place: Ford Bronco Sport

• Overall rating: 6.3 (out of 10)
• Base price: $34,385
• As-tested price: $43,750
• Good: Rugged looks backed up by off-road ability; interior tech always works
• Bad: Gets way too pricey; there's not enough room in here; cargo space is cramped

The Ford Bronco Sport is easily the most off-road-ready SUV of this bunch, especially if you go for the new Sasquatch model. With good ground clearance, a locking rear differential, all-terrain tires and underbody protection, the Bronco Sport has what it takes to get you across the road less traveled. We also like its fun styling and the tech inside works flawlessly — even if we still want for physical climate controls instead of them being buried in the screen.

But there are a few issues here. The cargo floor is small compared to rivals, and despite the rear shelf, there just isn't as much room for wider items. It's also cramped; the front seats are fine, but there is practically no room in the back for average-size adults. Access to the rear seats is also difficult, and the doors don't open very wide. But perhaps the biggest knock to the Bronco Sport is just how pricey it can get. Fully loaded models can cost north of $46,000, and you're just not getting enough car for that kind of money.

7th place: Nissan Rogue

• Overall rating: 6.4 (out of 10)
• Base price: $30,585
• As-tested price: $36,735
• Good: Attractive off-road styling; good fuel economy
• Bad: Noisy cabin; lacks technology features

Even though styling doesn't really factor into our scoring, it has to be mentioned that the Rock Creek version of the Nissan Rogue really makes a great first impression. It has the right off-road touches to make it look rugged without going overboard, and the grille gives it good presence. On a more practical note, the Rogue also offers the best fuel economy of the gas-only SUVs we had in our test. Even the all-wheel-drive versions are going to offer you over 30 mpg combined, for the most part.

Where the Rogue struggles is technology. Most trim levels, including the mid-grade Rock Creek, are stuck with a dinky 8-inch touchscreen that sits atop the dashboard in a housing that's too large, making the display feel even smaller. The surround-view camera system is good, but the screen is so small you'll be craning your neck to see it. And to compound things, if you get the smaller screen you do not get wireless Android Auto or Apple CarPlay — features that are standard on all of the other vehicles mentioned here. On the road, the Rogue also lacks refinement with a noisy cabin and a powertrain that feels (and sounds) strained.

6th place: Mazda CX-50

• Overall rating: 7.4 (out of 10)
• Base price: $31,395
• As-tested price: $35,620
• Good: Super high-quality cabin; this thing is a hoot to drive; turbo power available
• Bad: The hybrid isn't worth your time; tech implementation is frustrating

The Mazda CX-50 has one of the nicest cabins of any car here. The materials feel upscale, there are a lot of buttons that are tactile and high quality and the overall design just says "classy." We also like the way the CX-50 drives. The engine is responsive, the steering feels sharp, and you can get a turbocharged version that makes a lot of power for a small SUV.

Once again, tech is the ultimate deal-breaker. The screen is mounted far way from the driver, and it demands you use Mazda's scroll wheel if the car isn't in park. Mazda's software isn't built that well either, and too many commands are buried deep in menus and take too long to get to.

The CX-50 can be had as a hybrid, but this model trades the gas engine's response and punch for slow acceleration and poor fuel economy. It's the only instance out of this entire group where we recommend going for the gas-only car instead.

5th place: Honda CR-V

• Overall rating: 7.5 (out of 10)
• Base price: $32,370
• As-tested price: $43,700
• Good: Great to drive; high-quality interior
• Bad: Missing the good stuff; the tech you want is expensive

Honda has nailed the feel of the CR-V. All of the SUV's touch points are well designed, so while you will find some cheap materials in the cabin, they're at least hidden in spots you won't see or interact with much. Beyond that, the CR-V hybrid is also great to drive, with better steering and handling than any of the other vehicles here, except maybe the Mazda CX-50. The Honda's powertrain and suspension both feel refined to a level beyond what you're getting in the other SUVs. And as a bonus: The rear doors also open nearly 90 degrees, making it really easy to install or remove a car seat.

What hurts the CR-V is a lack of features. You won't find a panoramic sunroof, cooled front seats or a surround-view camera system. We like the infotainment tech with Google Built-In integration, but the problem is that it's only offered on the most expensive trim level. All of the other CR-V variants have a much worse tech experience that feels like it belongs in a car from five or six years ago, not something that was just refreshed earlier this year.

4th place: Volkswagen Tiguan

• Overall rating: 7.6 (out of 10)
• Base price: $32,280
• As-tested price: $45,410
• Good: Luxury car interior on a budget; great set of features
• Bad: You'll pay more for those features; subpar fuel economy

If there was a most improved award, the Volkswagen Tiguan would take it home, hands down. The last Tiguan felt like an afterthought, but this new car feels like a true German luxury car on a budget. Interior materials and build quality are both top-notch, it's good to drive, and the tech implementation is great. Volkswagen brought back physical controls for most of the main functions like the volume knob and the buttons on the steering wheel, and top-spec models get massaging seats — that's unheard of in the small SUV class. 

The negatives? There aren't many. The VW can get pricey, with top-spec models touching $45,000, but you don't need to spring for the priciest trim to get the same high-quality surroundings. Also, most of the climate controls are still in the big center touchscreen, and those that aren't are annoying-to-use touch-sensitive sliders. Yuck. Lastly, because there's no hybrid, the Tiguan's fuel economy is one of the worst here. Volkswagen says there's a hybrid model coming, but we'll believe it when we see it. 

3rd place: Toyota RAV4

• Overall rating: 8.1 (out of 10)
• Base price: $34,000 (est.)
• As-tested price: $37,000 (est.)
• Good: Lots of standard features; very fuel-efficient
• Bad: Small back seat; subscriptions required

The all-new, all-hybrid RAV4 is much improved over its predecessor, but it isn't enough to vault it to the top of this list. We are very impressed with the standard equipment the RAV4 offers, especially when it comes to technology. It's the only SUV here to offer a fully digital instrument cluster (a 12.3-inch one at that) and an integrated dash cam, a feature that consumers are very keen on. If you're looking to save fuel, the RAV4 is the most efficient vehicle here with even all-wheel-drive models offering 42 mpg combined.

That's all great, but there are a few things that keep the Toyota from the top spot. Its cabin is smaller than the those of the other SUVs in this test, with less rear legroom. And with a rear-facing car seat installed, the front passenger will be squeezed up close to the dashboard. The RAV4's new infotainment system is a big improvement, but to use the voice commands and navigation after a year will require a monthly data subscription. Honda gives you three free years of data and Chevrolet gives you eight, making the Toyota feel stingy by comparison.

2nd place: Kia Sportage Hybrid

• Overall rating: 8.7 (out of 10)
• Base price: $30,135
• As-tested price: $41,835
• Good: Spacious cabin; great ride refinement
• Bad: Frustrating in-cabin controls; below-average small-item storage

The Kia Sportage Hybrid has a list of highlights that's almost too long to get through. Its cabin is spacious and we love the varied use of materials inside. It also has one of the biggest, most space-efficient interiors of the bunch, and the seats are supremely comfortable. The Sportage Hybrid doesn't skimp out on tech either, with dual 12.3-inch displays and an easy-to-use infotainment screen. It also comes standard with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. 

The Kia loses out in two key areas, though. The first is small-item storage — even though its cupholders are large, it doesn't offer clever solutions for larger items. But the big one is the dual-use screen for both the media and climate controls. That little row of touch controls at the bottom of the dashboard uses a touch button to swap between either the climate controls or the media ones. The design of the buttons isn't very good to begin with, and the problem is made worse when you need to change the volume, but the knobs have been set to control the temperature. Getting stuck in the wrong screen happens all the time, and the touch controls are nearly impossible to use without taking your eyes off the road. Frankly, this implementation shouldn't have ever made it past the planning stage, and it's why the Kia comes in second place.

1st place: Hyundai Tucson Hybrid

• Overall rating: 8.7 (out of 10)
• Base price: $31,300
• As-tested price: $43,425
• Good: High-quality cabin; comfortable seating
• Bad: Touchscreen climate controls; fuel economy

The Hyundai Tucson is very closely related to the Kia Sportage, but we gave it the edge here for a few important reasons. Though the cabins are close in terms of material quality and dimensions, we think the Hyundai barely takes the edge in refinement and front seat comfort. The back seats of both vehicles are super comfortable as well, with multiple recline adjustments and tons of room. The Tucson also has an advantage in small-item storage, with an extra shelf in front of the passenger.

If we have one complaint about the Hyundai, it's that the climate controls live in a touchscreen. It's still a better setup than the one in the Sportage because that screen isn't used for anything else, so they don't shuffle around. But if they're not going to move, why not just use a button? 

However, something that both the Hyundai and Kia share is a lack of efficiency. These two only get 35 mpg combined with all-wheel drive, making them more costly at the pump than their hybridized peers. But that being said, these two do make up that gap in other ways with their excellent warranties and great feature-for-money ratios.

So, there you have it. Ten SUVs, top to bottom, with the Kia and Hyundai deservedly on top. But with so many excellent choices among these vehicles, you can afford to be picky. Figure out what's most important to you and chances are, one of these will be a perfect match.