Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the small family car segment and utilize the same 5-door hatchback body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Ford-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 120hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 125hp one.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 13% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Ford does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Ford badge with 4.5 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed V40 as average reliability-wise, and Focus is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Swedish car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Volvo is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.7 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 190 kilometers per hour, 3km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (54 mpg), in combined cycle.

Volvo appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Swedish car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Volvo. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.