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 suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific hybrid engine choice they offer. The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 398hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 324hp engine designed by BYD.

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. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Swedish car offers a marginal difference of 3% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that BYD as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 3.2, and models under the BYD badge with out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Swedish car rank it on average as 3.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Volvo is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 180 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 1.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (235 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 slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Volvo. 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.