Last updated: 2026-03-04

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester: Reliability Compared

Mazda CX-50 reliability comparison

Mazda CX-50

67
GoodReliability score: 67 out of 100, rated Good
VS
More ReliableSubaru Forester reliability comparison

Subaru Forester

74
GoodReliability score: 74 out of 100, rated Good

Choosing between the Mazda CX-50 and the Subaru Forester? This page compares their reliability scores, NHTSA recall history, owner-reported complaints, and estimated annual repair costs so you can make a confident long-term ownership decision between these two midsize suvs.

Our reliability scores are based on NHTSA recall and complaint data, independent repair cost estimates, and sales-normalized complaint rates. The Subaru Forester currently leads with an average score of 74/100 compared to 67/100. Scroll down for the full year-by-year breakdown, common problem areas, and repair cost comparison.

How Do the Mazda CX-50 and Subaru Forester Generations Compare?

The Subaru Forester is currently in its fifth generation (SK), introduced in 2019 and last refreshed in 2022, making it a mature platform likely benefiting from several years of refinement and reliability improvements. As it approaches the end of its cycle, potential buyers might find it more reliable due to the resolution of earlier issues typically seen in newer models. The Mazda CX-50, on the other hand, is in its first generation (VA), launched in 2023. While a facelift is planned for 2025, being early in its lifecycle means it might still be addressing initial production kinks. Generally, established platforms like the Forester's tend to offer more reliability compared to newer models like the CX-50.

Verdict

The Subaru Forester is more reliable than the Mazda CX-50, scoring 74/100 vs 67/100.

The Subaru Forester demonstrates a higher average reliability score of 77/100 compared to the Mazda CX-50's 66/100, indicating a more dependable performance overall. Despite having more total recalls, the Forester's owner complaints per 10,000 sold are significantly lower at 8.7 compared to the CX-50's 27.4, highlighting a better track record in user satisfaction. While both vehicles face issues with their electrical systems, the Forester's estimated annual repair cost of $632 adds an advantage by providing a tangible measure of potential maintenance expenses. Overall, the Subaru Forester emerges as the more reliable option based on these metrics.

Key Differences

  1. 1Subaru Forester has 18.7 fewer complaints per 10k sold
  2. 2Subaru Forester scores 7 points higher in reliability
  3. 3Mazda CX-50 has 7 fewer total recalls

Category Scoreboard

1Mazda CX-50
—
2Subaru Forester
Reliability ScoreTotal RecallsComplaint RateSafety Rating

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester: Which Is More Reliable?

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester at-a-glance reliability comparison
MetricMazda CX-50Subaru Forester
Reliability Score67/10074/100
Years Tracked49
Total Recalls613
Complaints per 10k Sold27.48.7
Safety RatingNHTSA overall
2026 NHTSA
2026 NHTSA
Frontal
Side
Rollover
Year Wins03

What Are the Common Problems With the Mazda CX-50 and Subaru Forester?

The Subaru Forester and Mazda CX-50 present different problem profiles, with the Forester showing a higher volume of complaints, particularly in visibility/wiper issues, which account for 819 complaints. Notably, the Forester also has significant crash-linked complaints in vehicle speed control (26) and air bags (22), indicating potential safety concerns. In contrast, the Mazda CX-50, with only 96 total complaints, shows a more balanced distribution across categories, but forward collision avoidance issues, while fewer, have a relatively higher crash-linked rate with 2 out of 6 complaints. Overall, the Forester's higher incidence of crash-linked complaints across multiple categories suggests a more pronounced reliability challenge compared to the CX-50.

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester common problem areas comparison
ComponentMazda CX-50Subaru Forester
UNKNOWN OR OTHER3.1Average1.2Low
VISIBILITY/WIPER0.6Very Low3.1Average
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM2.3Low1.2Low
POWER TRAIN2.9Low0.4Very Low
SERVICE BRAKES3.1Average0.1Very Low
STRUCTURE2.9Low—None
STEERING2Low0.2Very Low
SUSPENSION2Low—None
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE1.7Low0.1Very Low
AIR BAGS0.6Very Low0.5Very Low
LANE DEPARTURE0.6Very Low—None
WHEELS0.6Very Low—None
SEATS0.6Very Low—None
ENGINE—None0.4Very Low
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL—None0.2Very Low
VISIBILITY—None0.2Very Low
EXTERIOR LIGHTING—None—None

Complaints per 10,000 units sold, aggregated across all tracked model years from NHTSA owner reports.

Which Is Cheaper to Maintain: Mazda CX-50 or Subaru Forester?

Based on independent repair cost data, the Subaru Forester has an annual repair cost of $632, with drivers typically making 0.4 repair visits per year and facing a 13% risk of encountering a major repair. While specific figures for the Mazda CX-50 are unavailable, the Forester's data suggest a relatively low frequency of repairs and a moderate risk of major issues. For cost-conscious buyers, the Subaru Forester provides a clear picture of maintenance expectations, making it a potentially better value if the Mazda CX-50's costs are higher or similar but less predictable. Over five years, the predictable costs of the Forester could amount to around $3,160, providing clarity for budgeting.

How Does Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester Reliability Compare by Year?

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester year-by-year reliability scores
YearMazda CX-50Subaru ForesterEdge
202566/1003R / 21C79/1002R / 48CSubaru Forester
202471/1001R / 26C78/1002R / 26CSubaru Forester
202365/1002R / 49C79/1001R / 61CSubaru Forester
2026(predicted)67/100(predicted)79/100(predicted)Subaru Forester

Best years to cross-shop: The 2024 Mazda CX-50 scored 71/100 and the 2025 Subaru Forester scored 79/100 — these represent the strongest model years in our tracking range.

Who Should Buy the Mazda CX-50 vs the Subaru Forester?

If you prioritize reliability and lower maintenance concerns, the Subaru Forester is the better choice for you. With a higher reliability score of 77/100, it offers a more dependable experience compared to the Mazda CX-50's score of 66/100. The Forester has a lower owner complaint rate of 8.7 per 10,000 sold and an estimated annual repair cost of $632, suggesting it may be less of a headache in the long run. However, consider that it has had more recalls, with a total of 13, and a major repair risk of 13%. On the other hand, if you are more focused on specific issues like service brakes or power train, the Mazda CX-50 may catch your interest despite its lower reliability score. It has fewer total recalls at 6, but a higher complaint rate of 27.4 per 10,000 sold, indicating potential concerns that may require attention. This model might appeal to those who are willing to take a risk for a more distinct driving experience but should be ready for possible higher maintenance needs.

Mazda CX-50 vs Subaru Forester: Common Questions

Is the Mazda CX-50 more reliable than the Subaru Forester?
Based on our data, the Subaru Forester is more reliable with an average score of 74/100 compared to 67/100. The difference is modest, so both are reasonable choices.
Which has more recalls, the Mazda CX-50 or the Subaru Forester?
The Subaru Forester has more recalls (13) compared to the Mazda CX-50 (6). More recalls don't always mean worse reliability — some are minor — but it's worth reviewing what each recall covers.
Which has fewer owner complaints, the Mazda CX-50 or the Subaru Forester?
Adjusted for sales volume, the Subaru Forester has a lower complaint rate at 8.7 per 10,000 sold versus 27.4 for the Mazda CX-50. This per-sales normalization gives a fairer comparison than raw totals.
Is the Mazda CX-50 or Subaru Forester safer?
Both the Mazda CX-50 and Subaru Forester received the same NHTSA overall safety rating of 5/5 stars. Check the frontal, side, and rollover sub-ratings above for a more detailed comparison.

Related Reliability Comparisons

How We Calculate Reliability Scores

Auto Reliability Index scores are calculated on a 0–100 scale using a weighted formula that combines multiple public data sources. Each factor is weighted based on its predictive value for real-world ownership experience.

Key Ranking Factors

1

Complaint Severity

NHTSA owner complaints weighted by component category (e.g., powertrain, safety systems, electronics, cosmetic) — safety-critical issues carry more weight than cosmetic ones. Adjusted for sales volume so high-volume models aren't unfairly penalized.

2

Repair Costs

Independent reliability ratings based on repair frequency, average repair costs, and severity of typical repairs for each model.

3

Recall Impact

Number of NHTSA recalls weighted by severity. “Stop driving” and fire-risk recalls are penalized more heavily than minor software or labeling recalls.

4

Issue Diversity

Measures how many major vehicle systems (engine, transmission, electrical, braking, etc.) have recorded complaints. A vehicle with issues spread across many systems may indicate systemic quality issues.

Scores are grouped into four tiers:

  • 80–100: Excellent — Top-tier reliability, minimal issues
  • 60–79: Good — Reliable with some minor concerns
  • 40–59: Mixed — Notable issues, research before buying
  • 0–39: Risky — Significant problems, proceed with caution

Data is sourced from NHTSA recall records, owner complaint filings, and independent repair databases. Scores are recalculated as new data becomes available. While the weighting model is proprietary, all underlying data sources are public and traceable.

See incorrect data? Report an issue