My Take on the Zero-Sum New-Vehicle Market in the US: Decades of Stagnation & Decline Interrupted by Steep Plunges

But not all automakers are losers in this tough market.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Sales of new light vehicles – pickups, SUVs, crossovers, sedans, vans, etc. – inched up 0.5% year-over-year in Q2 to 4.22 million vehicles, after having dropped by 6.3% year-over-year in Q1.  For the first half, new vehicle sales are down by 2.8% from a year ago, according to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

But March and April 2025 had been marked by tariff front-running, and sales had spiked during those two months as people had believed the clickbait in the media that tariffs would cause new vehicle prices to explode. When that didn’t happen, sales fell in the months that followed. So the year-over-year comparisons have those distortions to contend with.

Ford deliveries plunged by 10% year-over-year in Q2, and GM’s deliveries dropped by 4%, but Hyundai-Kia’s deliveries have been rising from record to record, and did so again in Q2. Sales by other automakers also rose, including those of Stellantis and Nissan, by 6% and 10% respectively, from the collapsed levels a year ago.

Sales in Q2 2026 (4.22 million vehicles) were below Q2 1978 (4.39 million), below Q2 1986 (4.27 million), barely above Q2 1988 and 1996 (each 4.18 million), below Q2 1998 (4.43 million), below Q2 1999 (4.60 million), below Q2 2000 (4.73 million, the Q2 record), below Q2 2001 (4.57 million), etc. etc.

You get the idea of the long-term problem for automakers in the US: Overall sales have been stagnant or declining for 50 years, interrupted by steep plunges, despite population growth and economic growth.

A big reason that new-vehicle sales have been in long-term stagnation or decline, interrupted by deep plunges, is that automakers, in their short-termism and allegiance to Wall Street, kept going upscale year after year and jacking up prices to fatten their profit margins and please Wall Street – with the big three US automakers going as far as scuttling their sedan models because their profit margins were thinner than on trucks and SUVs – thereby losing customers in the process, which caused unit sales to decline further.

As the big automakers – specifically GM, Ford, and what is now Stellantis – have fallen into this trap, other automakers have not, particularly Hyundai-Kia, and their sales continued to soar from record to record. Not all automakers are losers in this zero-sum game (my charts of annual sales by automaker through 2025).

With the first six months under the belt, we can now estimate annual sales for 2026 to come out slightly below the annual sales of 2025.

Annual new vehicle sales had peaked in 2000 and 2016, each followed by a long deep plunge and a slow recovery.

In this kind of zero-sum market, growth by one automaker means declines at others.

Top 7 automakers’ deliveries in Q2 and the first half of 2026.

#1 General Motors, Q2 deliveries: -4.2% year-over-year, to 714,896 vehicles, all brands combined.

YTD deliveries: -6.8% year-over-year, to 1,341,325 vehicles.

#2 Toyota, Q2 deliveries: +1.1% year-over-year, to 673,971 vehicles, Toyota and Lexus brands combined.

YTD deliveries: +0.5% year-over-year, to 1,243,391 vehicles, with Lexus sales -5.2% and Toyota sales +1.5%.

#3 Ford, Q2 deliveries: -10.3% year-over-year, to 549,200 vehicles, Ford and Lincoln brands combined.

YTD deliveries: -9.6% year-over-year, 1,006,515 vehicles.

 #4 Hyundai-Kia, Q2 deliveries: +2.8% year-over-year, to 468,892 vehicles, a record Q2.

YTD deliveries: 3.0% year-over-year, to 881,295 vehicles.

Hyundai is the parent company of Kia, with Hyundai holding a 33.9% stake in Kia, and Kia holding stakes in Hyundai subsidiaries, and they share vehicle platforms. For our purposes here, the duo counts as one automaker with different brands.

The automaker has been the big winner in the zero-sum US auto market, along with Tesla, taking share away from the others and growing relentlessly at their expense.

#5 Honda, Q2 deliveries: +8.4% year-over-year, to 420,089 vehicles, Honda and Acura brands combined.

YTD deliveries: +2.4% year-over-year, to 756,920 vehicles.

But these year-over-year increases leave sales well below the peak in 2017. Full-year 2025 sales were down by 13% from the 2017 peak.

#6 Stellantis, Q2 deliveries: +5.9% year-over-year, all brands combined, to 328,284 vehicles, ticking up from the abysmal levels last year. Annual 2025 deliveries were down by 44% from the peak in 2015.

YTD deliveries: +5.2% year-over-year, to 634,345 vehicles.

#7 Nissan Q2 deliveries: +10.2% year-over-year, to 230,443 vehicles, Nissan and Infiniti combined, from the collapsed levels a year ago: Annual 2025 deliveries were down by 42% from the peak in 2017.

YTD deliveries: +0.4% year-over-year, to 464,761 vehicles.

Tesla only discloses global sales, not US sales. In Q2, Tesla’s global deliveries rose 25% year-over-year from the abysmal sales in Q2 last year, to 480,126 vehicles, squeaking past the prior Q2 record set in Q2 2023, as high gasoline prices globally caused demand for EVs to re-surge. But Tesla doesn’t report US sales, so it doesn’t fit into this lineup. Here’s my report on Tesla’s Q2 global deliveries.

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the mug to find out how:




To subscribe to WOLF STREET...

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new articles by email. It's free.

Join 13.8K other subscribers

  7 comments for “My Take on the Zero-Sum New-Vehicle Market in the US: Decades of Stagnation & Decline Interrupted by Steep Plunges

  1. Kracow says:

    Would love to see the US bring in some Chinese competitors.

    So many of these brands have just nothing new in their cars are meh to begin with.

    I’m still surprised consumers buy a new cars in this market.

    • Chris B. says:

      But don’t we all strive to work a whole year or more to afford a bubble shaped Shopping Utility Vehicle with a bigger dash screen and low profile tires that will pop on the first pothole?

      Sure, the CVT transmission will eat itself in three years, but for a short moment in time we’ll be able to buy 15 cases of toilet paper from Costco and take a selfie doing it.

  2. Shiloh says:

    I’m looking for a “new” 1995 “D” this or a 2006 “F” that. The kiddies can keep their screens. Today, I would never buy a 2026 new car from the companies that made those I partially referenced.

  3. Richard Rozanski says:

    Nissan’s CEO is blaming their lackluster sales on its association with rental fleets. He stated that a strategy of chasing volume sales to rental car companies “cheapened the brand” by associating the brand, in people’s minds, with rental cars.

    • Wolf Richter says:

      The rental business cuts both ways: It gives rental customers a chance to take extended real-world test drives in different vehicles, and if they’re impressed, they might buy that model later. That happened to us.

      We ended up with a Ford Fusion Hybrid as a rental in early 2020 to go skiing in the Sierra Nevada, just when we were looking to replace our 14-year-old real-wheel-drive gas-guzzler Infiniti. We liked it a lot, including the relaxed way the hybrid powertrain operates (no shifting), and were impressed with the mpg we were getting (double that our Infiniti), and ended up buying a Fusion Hybrid a few weeks later directly from a rental fleet.

      Obviously, Ford didn’t benefit from that sale at all since it was a used car. And Ford scuttled the Fusion after the 2020 model year, along with its other sedan models. Ford cannot be helped. If there is a stupid decision within reach, the executives at Ford will invariably reach for it.

    • Chris B. says:

      Nissan was killed, and continues to be killed, by their CVT transmissions.

      These often die before 100k miles, and cost more than the car is worth to replace. Resale value is in the toilet, mechanics hate them, and people are increasingly embarrassed to own the brand.

  4. northernlights says:

    I’m waiting to see if Slate Auto can bring their truck to market as projected. CAFE footprint standards in the 2010s killed the compact truck market and I suspect the big three were happy to go upscale.

    People used to buy trucks because they were cheap. The Slate will be cheap like an old truck ($25k today was about $2900 in 1970) but now we get AC plus a vehicle that won’t kill you in a crash.

    I love the online chatter about how having crank windows means nobody will buy it, and how 205 miles of range isn’t enough. Anyone who drove a V8 anything back in the 70s knows that you probably wanted to look for gas before you made it 200 miles, and if you do the math (about 0.3 kW/mile) these will be cheap to run compared to a gas car.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *