These were the top 10 best-selling EVs in the US in 2025

U.S. EV sales topped roughly 1.27 million units in 2025 (7.8% of new-car sales) despite a 36% year-over-year decline in Q4 after the $7,500 federal tax credit expired; Tesla remained dominant with about 589,000 vehicles (46.2% share) while GM surged 48% to 169,887 units driven by new models such as the Chevy Equinox EV (57,945, +100.7%). Top-selling models included the Tesla Model Y (357,528, -4.0%), Model 3 (189,903, +1.3%), Mustang Mach‑E (51,620) and Hyundai IONIQ 5 (47,039); analysts expect EV share to rise to roughly 8% in 2026 as sub-$30k entries and 30+ new launches pressure pricing and dealer discounting, with implications for OEM inventory, pricing strategies and competitive positioning.

Analysis

Market structure: Tesla remains dominant (46% share) so scale and software monetize better-than-adjacent OEMs, but GM is the clear second-order winner — EV sales +48% and Equinox EV +101% show GM gaining pricing and distribution power in the mass SUV segment where volume and dealer networks matter. The Q4 -36% collapse vs. prior year (tax-credit pull-forward) reveals demand elasticity: subsidies and <$30k models will be the lever to grow share above ~8% in 2026.

Risk assessment: Tail risks include a policy reversal or retroactive tax-credit clarifications (30–90 days) that could re‑pull demand, a major battery raw-material squeeze lifting costs >15% and compressing margins over 6–12 months, or large recalls for new platforms causing production halts. Hidden dependencies: non‑Tesla OEMs rely on dealer networks/residual values and captive financing — heavy discounting could impair used EV residuals and captive ABS pricing.

Trade implications: Prefer convex, asymmetric exposure to OEMs gaining mid-priced volume (GM) and to commodity suppliers (lithium/copper). Short-duration tactical risk around near-term guidance/earnings (days–weeks) and use 6–12 month directional and options spreads to express view while limiting premium. Rotate out of lower‑share/high‑capex EV names (Ford) into differentiated scale (Tesla selectively) and suppliers.

Contrarian angles: Consensus underweights GM’s advantage converting ICE distribution to EV volume; market may be overstating Ford’s F‑series EV halo given Lightning -18% YOY and financing/residual risk. Historical parallel: subsidy cliff pull-forwards (solar/EV) create volatility then reprice leaders; watch unintended consequence — deep discounts that expand adoption can also permanently lower realized margins for many OEMs.

Key Decisions for Investors

• Establish a 2–3% long position in GM (ticker: GM) over 6–12 months ahead of Q1 2026 results; thesis: mid‑price SUV volume growth and dealer distribution should drive 25–40% upside if ramp continues; set stop-loss at -15% and review after two consecutive quarters of >20% YOY EV unit growth.
• Implement a relative-value pair: long GM (2% notional) / short Ford (F) (1.5% notional) for 3–9 months to capture GM share gains and Ford EV margin risk; target relative outperformance of 10–20% or unwind at 9 months.
• Buy a capped-bull call spread on GM to express upside with defined risk: buy Jan 2027 GM 40C / sell Jan 2027 GM 60C sized to 1% of portfolio notional; rationale: capture upside from continued Equinox/Blazer ramps while limiting premium loss.
• Initiate 1–2% commodity exposure to battery metals via LIT (lithium ETF) for 6–12 months; target >20% upside if EV production continues to accelerate and metal tightness emerges, with stop-loss at -20%.
• Reduce net exposure to Ford by trimming existing long positions by ~50% immediately or establish a 1–2% short if unexposed, given weak EV volumes and elevated discounting risk; revisit after Ford Q1 2026 guidance or notable incentive changes within 60 days.