Top 10 Slowest Depreciating Cars

Top 10 Slowest Depreciating Cars

It’s a well known fact that a car depreciates the moment you drive it off the lot, but some cars hold their value better than others.

On average a new car loses 12 percent of its value within one year, according to But some cars lose less than 10 percent within that year. Here’s a list of the slowest depreciating cars over their first year of ownership, although the car sitting at the number one spot actually gained some value.

10. Honda CR-V (-9%)

Honda CR-V

First on the list is Honda’s popular crossover, the CR-V. Hitting 2015 with amay  mild refresh that saw the car get a new transmission and an updated interior, its value dropped just nine percent in its first year of ownership. The CR-V starts at $24,200, and we recently pitted it against the Subaru Forester.

SEE ALSO: 2015 Honda CR-V vs 2015 Subaru Forester 

9. Toyota FJ Cruiser (-8.7 %)


Toyota trucks have a reputation for maintaining high resale values, and the FJ Cruiser continues that trend. According to iSeeCars, it’s tied for ninth place, with its value dropping just 8.7 percent in one year. It’s a shame that the easily recognizable FJ will be riding off into the sunset for 2015, as it has a loyal and fanatic group of followers that keep it in high demand.

SEE ALSO: 2014 Toyota FJ Cruiser Review

9. Nissan Versa (-8.7 %)


Also tied for ninth place is the affordable Nissan Versa Sedan. This subcompact comes in at under $13,000 after destination and while it doesn’t come with many luxuries at that price, it only lost 8.7 percent of its value in one year.

7. Scion xB (-8.2 %)


The Scion xB loses just 8.2 percent of its value in one year, giving this typically reliable compact another solid reason for purchase. Starting at under $20,000 after destination, the xB uses a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that makes 158-hp and is good for 24 MPG combined.

6. Mercedes G-Class (-8 %)


The big Mercedes-Benz G-Class sits in the number six spot as it depreciates just 8 percent in one year. With a starting price of $116,325, the G class comes with a 5.5-liter V8 that makes 382 hp and 391 lb-ft of torque. Although it loses just eight percent in one year, that means it actually is worth about $9,300 less after twelve months, which is a pretty significant amount of money.

5.  Nissan Frontier (-7.9 %)


The first rugged pickup hits our list at number five, but it is a bit of a surprise seeing the Nissan Frontier here. The small pickup loses just 7.9 percent of its value in one year. The Frontier starts at $18,875, and has the option of either a four-cylinder or six-cylinder engine under the hood.

4. Jeep Wrangler (-7.1 %)


Depreciating just 7.1 percent in one year, the Jeep Wrangler continues to be a resale value king. Offered in two or four-doors as the Wrangler Unlimited, the iconic Jeep comes standard with a 3.6-liter V6 engine that makes 285 hp.

3.  Toyota Tacoma (-6.9)


Another Toyota makes the list, this time its the well known Tacoma. The compact pickup is available with a four or six-cylinder engine, and starts at just $21,850 after destination. After one year, the Toyota loses just 6.9 percent of its value. We recently compared the Tacoma to the new Chevrolet Colorado and found the that the next generation Tacoma can’t come soon enough.

SEE ALSO: 2015 Chevrolet Colorado vs 2015 Toyota Tacoma

2.  Subaru Impreza (-3 %)


The only compact car that comes standard with all-wheel drive, the Subaru Impreza has a leg up on many of its competitors. Helping to plead its case is the low depreciation hit it takes after just one year. Owners can expect their Impreza to lose only 3 percent of its value during that time. For 2015 the Impreza is now available with the brands EyeSight safety technology that gives the compact cool features like lane departure warning and adaptive cruise control.

SEE ALSO: 2015 Subaru Impreza Review

1. Land Rover Range Rover (+3.3 %)


Who would have guessed that a Range Rover would have topped this list? Luxury cars are typically known for depreciating quickly, but that isn’t the case with the new Range Rover, which actually appreciated in value over one year by 3.3 percent. The Range Rover is available with two supercharged engines, a V6 motor that makes 340-hp or a V8 unit that makes 510. Regardless of which one you get, the car is loaded with luxury.

  • Shobin Drogan

    Say WHAAATTT??

  • Maximania

    I’d like to throw in the WRX as an addendum. Look up a WRX/WRX STi in the used market, and those things hold their value like crazy. It’s almost not worth buying a used one. Get it new and sell 4 years later for almost the same price. Also very hard to find because owners hold on to them forever

  • VoiceofReason14

    Volkswagen Golf TDI, Porsche 911. What ill informed consumers are buying used Land Rovers?

  • Grman Rodriguez

    What do a diesel Golf and a 911 have anything to do with Land Rovers?

  • Andy

    If its cheaper to buy a range rover new why wouldn’t people do just that? Is it low volume production?

  • Nomad

    Where is the Toyota 4runner? If the Tacoma is in this, then surely the 4runner can’t be far behind?

  • I hope that AutoGuide should use your comment as a loophole.

  • Ricardo Echeverry

    What guides were used to determine these values? Imaginary estimates from KBB and Edmunds? This is what creates poorly educated consumers expecting close to retail value for a trade in, because let’s face the fact, most consumer will never privately sell their one year old vehicle. Typical depreciation for most new vehicles is 10 to 20%, if this weren’t the case, used car sales would be non existant.

  • Richard

    The used Land Rovers cost more because people put nice wheels, window tint and such in them and since they never leave the dealer’s repair facility due to all the problems, you have a one year old car with virtually no miles, new car smell and added value the first purchaser never got to use. Makes sense to me. Seriously? I’ve heard many of the Rovers are in short supply due to demand. I don’t particular understand the demand but that’s what I’ve heard. As for the other vehicles? The Versa, the Frontier and others just do not seem feasible and I believe misleading data has to have been used or otherwise simply misinterpreted by the article’s author.

  • VoiceofReason14

    They have really great resale values. Land Rovers are hunks of shit.

  • Red Merle

    What are you basing this universal slagging off of Land Rovers on? Have you owned any of them, or is it also based “on what I’ve heard”, i.e. rumour?

  • Red Merle

    I hadn’t realised that they are “hunks of shit”. I wish you’d told me that before I’d completely wasted the last 130,000 miles and 4 years enjoying driving them. Still, it’s nice that you’ve finally let me know – better late than never!

  • Richard

    Honestly, I do not have any experience with those Land Rovers of recent years. More models in the late 70s and 80s which could be made reliable w/some work but didn’t come from the factory that way. Land Rover I am sure has gotten better in quality but the stigma stays around. As I stated the real reason they are holding their values seems to be the lack of supply which at least speaks well of their current appeal.

  • Adam

    Multiple lists (J.D Power most notably) states that Land Rover is one of the most unreliable car companies to date.

  • batman

    130K AND A MILLION IN REPAIRS….Bet you have a Dyson too and swear its the best…Also hunks of shit!

  • Red Merle

    As I’m the one who’s owned Land Rovers for 130,000 miles (and nothing but Dysons since 1993 – all of which have been brilliant) I’m probably in a better position to judge whether they are “hunks of sh**” or not, than someone that quotes no experience at all and relies on expletives instead of any hard evidence.
    As far as I know, you’ve owned neither.

  • Red Merle

    t really comment on Land Rovers from the ’70’s or 80’s, I’ve got no experience of those, I can only go on those that I’ve driven that were all build from 2011 onwards and they’ve been pretty good. In all fairness, not perfect, but good enough to run the first one to 90,000 miles in 2 1/2 years, with very little bother, then go back to buy another.

  • VoiceofReason14

    How many hunks of shit did you have to lease to get to 130,000 miles?

  • Red Merle

    It’s little wonder that we have lost so many skilled manufacturing jobs, that our balance of payments is screwed and our streets are littered with predictable, identikit, German cars, if this is the general state of “informed opinion”. I only hope that your own job isn’t “exported” through similar buyer’s ignorance!

    Fortunately, we still have some decent UK manufacturing and/or R&D left, even if we don’t own large chunks of it. Let’s give it a fair chance.

  • Mike Daniel

    4Runner is never near the top in this race. Starting price too high.

  • Mike Daniel

    Cheaper? Those things are approaching $100k

  • Mike Daniel

    My 2014 2 door Wrangler. I’ll vouch for it’s low depreciation. My 2012 Impreza? I would have never guessed it only dropped 3% in yr 1.

  • Sam

    Yea take that range rover and drive it right up to the week before the warranty ends….and dump it. The repairs will be $2500.00 to $5000.00 the first time you get towed into the shop!!

  • Masterofthearts

    Saying Dysons are terrible is kinda like saying Sennheisers are terrible. You have to have literally zero knowledge of the product to make that claim.

  • Red Merle

    Evidence to back this claim?

  • Darin

    I’m a mechanic with well over a decade of experience working on all makes of cars and trucks. Range Rovers are one of the worst money pits. They combine a lack of reliability with expensive parts and long labor times. I don’t know why anyone would buy one.

  • Darin

    The Versa only makes the list because it is so cheap to begin with.

  • Darin

    “4 years driving THEM”? So, you’ve had MULTIPLE Range Rovers over 4 years? Perhaps you just hit that sweet spot where they can go several months without costing several thousand dollars. Lucky you.

  • Darin

    My ’06 Tacoma is worth the same today as what I paid for it 3.5 years ago. My 23 year old Civic is worth more now than I paid for it 8 years ago. Granted, I’ve put a fair amount of work into it and taken care of it over that time, but if you’re truly focused on not losing money through the purchase and use of a car you aren’t even considering a new car.

  • Red Merle

    Strictly speaking, I’m driving Land Rovers, rather than Range Rovers (the first post was claiming that “Land Rovers are hunks of Sh**”, rather than Range Rovers).
    The first one of mine did 90,000 miles in 2 1/2 years, with the repairs totaling one rear diff ECU and one cracked pipe to an exhaust sensor (both covered under warranty) during that time. Not perfect, but not too shabby either.
    I can claim no experience of Range Rovers though.

  • Greg

    Same thought I had. I came here expecting to see the 4Runner on the list because it is well known to hold resale value extremely well. And Mike Daniel I’m not sure what you mean about the starting price being too high, when a Land Rover easily goes for what two 4Runners will cost you. It’s all about percentage of retained value of the original purchase price.

  • Nick

    They buy it for the name honestly

  • Nick

    They’re popular for the same reason as the Porsche suv shit. The name.

  • Jon

    you are 100% correct

  • Jon

    Agreed. WRX/STi and EVO all have amazing resale as long as a kid did not mod or beat it. At 1 point a few years ago the EVO had the highest residual value of any car.

  • Lee

    I’d prefer to see these numbers after three years. One year depreciation values, while fun to look at, can be affected by many factors such as the economy, the price of new models, and availability/shortages.

  • atomed

    What´s your opinion on 911s? the 997 precisely.