Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 4-door sedan body style within the same 'Luxury car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the BMW and front in the case of the Volvo). The first one has a BMW-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 252hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 254hp engine designed by Volvo.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the luxury car segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 13% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Volvo does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of BMW with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Volvo badge with 4.6 out of 5. The same official information place 5 Series as average reliability-wise, and S90 is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the German car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

BMW is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, 20km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (45 mpg), in combined cycle.

BMW 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. From there things take a different direction, with BMW offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say BMW. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.