Bulletin Vol. 31, No. 4
:
April 2014
Young teen crash risk by vehicle type
Previous HLDI studies have shown that collision claim frequencies are highest for young drivers. The purpose of this analysis is to
explore the extent to which collision claim frequencies vary by vehicle size and type for 15–17-year-old drivers relative to 35–50-year-
old drivers. Thirty-two different vehicle size and type groups were examined and, in all but one, claim frequencies were higher for young
teens than for prime-age drivers. Midsize sports cars had the highest claim frequency ratio of 2.6, indicating that claim rates for young
teens are 2.6 times as high as prime-age drivers. Twenty-one of the 32 vehicle size and type groups had claim frequency ratios that
were at least 1.5. Ten of the vehicle size and type groups had claim frequency ratios that were 2.0 or higher. Drivers age 15 to 17 are
over-represented in the exposure of small two- and four-door passenger cars; these two vehicle size/classes have claim frequency
ratios of at least 2.0, meaning teens are twice as likely as older drivers to have a crash driving these vehicles.
Introduction
When choosing a vehicle for their children, parents of teenagers oen factor in things like price and fuel eciency but
may lack information on which vehicles are safest for young drivers. To help guide parents in these decisions, studies
were performed comparing driver deaths and insurance losses of young teens and adults their parents’ age. Teens
typically learn to drive between the ages of 15 and 17, while their parents would be expected to be between 35 and 50.
ese two age groups were selected for analysis.
An analysis of the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) was conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety (IIHS) comparing the distribution of driver deaths by vehicle type and size. e analysis examined the extent
to which the fatality distribution for 15–17 year-olds diered from that for 35–50 year-olds in several vehicle size
and type categories. e FARS analysis showed young teen drivers were more likely to die in cars than older drivers.
Twenty-nine percent of teen driver deaths occured in small or mini cars.
is Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) study was conducted simultaneously with the IIHS analysis to determine if
collision claim frequencies for young teenagers relative to 35–50-year-old drivers varied similarly by vehicle size and
class. To ensure comparability, model years, and calendar years were identical to those in the IIHS and HLDI analy-
ses. ese two studies work together to provide a more complete picture of vehicle safety to parents and can provide
guidance in selecting a vehicle for young teenagers to operate when they rst learn to drive.
Methods
Study vehicles included 2000–13 models during calendar years 2008–12. For each calendar year, only the 10 most
current model years were included in the study (e.g., 2000–09 models in calendar year 2008). Vehicles in this study
included thirty-eight vehicle type and size categories. Six of these size and class categories could not be examined for
the young teen drivers, as they did not meet the minimum 1,000 years of exposure reporting threshold, yielding 32
categories.
Two rated driver age groups were used for this study: 15–17 (young teens) and 35–50 (hereaer referred to as prime-
age drivers). e teen age group was selected to focus on the safety behavior of young teenagers at their initial driving
years. e comparison ages of 35–50 were chosen as they are the most likely ages of the parents of these new drivers.
e rated driver is the driver who is considered to represent the greatest loss potential for the insured vehicle. In a
multiple-vehicle/driver household, how a driver is assigned to a vehicle can vary by insurance company and state.
A limitation of this study is that information on the actual driver at the time of a loss is not available in the
HLDI database. Among the rated drivers within the study, young teenagers represented just 1.3 percent of the total
collision exposure.
HLDI Bulletin
|
Vol 31, No.4 : April 2014 2
e primary metric used to evaluate dierences in crash risk by vehicle type for teens relative to prime-age drivers
was the ratio of young teenagers’ collision claim frequencies over prime-age drivers’ collision claim frequencies. Col-
lision claim frequencies are measured in claims per 100 insured vehicle years. e use of these ratios provides a con-
trol for dierent use patterns by vehicle sizes and types. Losses were reported for data points that have at least 1,000
insured vehicle years. For the entire study population, the collision claim frequency was 5.9 claims per 100 insured
vehicle years based upon 127,169,680 vehicle years and 7,544,895 collision claims.
Results
Table 1 shows the exposure, claims, and claim frequencies for the two study age groups during the study period.
Young teens represented 1.3 percent of collision exposure, yet were responsible for 2.4 percent of the collision claims.
Figure 1 shows how the claim frequency for the two groups compare. e collision claim frequency for the young teen
group was nearly twice that of the prime age group.
Table 1: Collision exposure and claim frequency by age group in calendar year 2008-12 period
Exposure Claims Claim frequency
Drivers age 15-17 1,667,704 178,523 10.7
Drivers age 35-50 125,501,976 7,366,372 5.9
Total 127,169,680 7,544,895 5.9
Figure 1: Collision claim frequencies by driver age group, 2000-13 models
Figure 2 shows collision claim frequencies for young teens by vehicle size and class. Claim frequencies ranged from a high
of 15.4 for small two-door cars to 3.2 for large cargo/passenger vans. e frequency for small cars was nearly 5 times the
lowest frequency. e six categories with the highest collision claim frequencies were all cars. In general, collision claim
frequencies decrease as vehicle size increases. is can clearly be seen within cars, pickups, and SUVs. For passenger cars,
with the exception of mini cars, the 2-door versions had higher collision claim frequencies than their 4-door counterpart.
0
5
10
15
35-50
year olds
15-17
year olds
HLDI Bulletin
|
Vol 31, No.4 : April 2014 3
Figure 2: Collision claim frequency for young teenage drivers by vehicle
size and class, 2000-13 models
Figure 3 shows collision claim frequencies for prime-age drivers by vehicle size and class. Claim frequencies ranged
from a high of 7.5 for very large luxury cars to 3.4 for large cargo/passenger vans. e frequency for very large luxury
cars was more than twice the lowest frequency. ere is less variation in the claim frequencies for prime-age drivers
than for young teens, measured either within vehicle types or across vehicle types. In Figure 2, there is a fairly clear
pattern of results, where claim frequencies decrease with vehicle size. at same pattern is not evident in Figure 3 for
drivers 35–50 years old.
Figure 3: Collision claim frequency for prime-age drivers by vehicle size and class, 2000-13 models
In order to allow for more meaningful comparisons between vehicle categories, the claim frequency ratio of young
teens to prime-age drivers was used. e claim frequency for prime-age drivers was used as an implicit control for
risk factors not related to age, such as dierent vehicle patterns of use. is ratio measures the relative crash risk of
a certain vehicle category for young teens. A young teen operating a vehicle belonging to a vehicle category with a
0
5
10
15
20
very large luxury
midsize luxury
small 2 door
midsize 2 door
large luxury
mini 4 door
small 4 door
midsize 4 door
large station wagon
very large luxury SUV
large sports
large 2 door
large 4 door
small luxury SUV
midsize luxury SUV
mini station wagon
large luxury SUV
small station wagon
very large 4 door
midsize sports
mini 2 door
small sports
very large minivan
midsize station wagon
midsize SUV
mini sports
small SUV
large SUV
large pickup
midsize minivan
midsize cargo / passenger van
very large SUV
small pickup
large minivan
mini SUV
very large pickup
micro 2 door
large cargo / passenger van
small 2 door
midsize sports
large 2 door
mini 4 door
small 4 door
midsize 2 door
mini station wagon
midsize luxury
midsize 4 door
mini 2 door
small station wagon
large sports
small sports
large 4 door
large station wagon
large luxury
small pickup
small SUV
midsize station wagon
midsize luxury SUV
midsize SUV
very large 4 door
very large luxury
large pickup
large luxury SUV
very large luxury SUV
very large minivan
large SUV
large minivan
very large pickup
very large SUV
large cargo / passenger
0
4
8
12
16
20
HLDI Bulletin
|
Vol 31, No.4 : April 2014 4
higher ratio is more prone to collision losses than when operating a vehicle with a lower category ratio. is does
assume that all other risk factors are the same. Figure 4 illustrates this ratio by vehicle category in descending order.
Midsize sports cars have the highest ratio of 2.6, whereas large cargo/passenger vans have the lowest ratio of 0.95. Ten
vehicle categories have a ratio above 2.0. Generally speaking, smaller vehicles tend to have higher ratios indicating
they are more risky for young teens.
Figure 4: Collision claim frequency ratio of young teenage drivers
to prime-age drivers by vehicle size and class, 2000-13 models
Figure 5 combines the collision claim frequency ratios from Figure 4 with the collision exposure distribution. Small
two-door cars, which had the sixth highest claim frequency ratio (2.1) showed the largest exposure dierence be-
tween the two age groups. Four percent of the young teen exposure is concentrated in the small two-door car cat-
egory, compared with 2 percent for the older drivers (35-50 years old). Small four-door cars also show a large exp-
soure discrepancy between the age groups. irteen percent of the young teen exposure is for small four-door cars
compared with 8 percent for prime-age adults.
Figure 5: Collision claim frequency ratio and exposure distribution
0
1
2
3
midsize sports
large 2 door
small pickup
mini 2 door
mini station wagon
small 2 door
mini 4 door
small sports
small 4 door
small station wagon
midsize 2 door
small SUV
large sports
midsize 4 door
midsize station wagon
large pickup
midsize SUV
midsize luxury
large 4 door
large station wagon
very large 4 door
very large pickup
midsize luxury SUV
large luxury
large minivan
large SUV
large luxury SUV
very large minivan
very large SUV
very large luxury
very large luxury SUV
large cargo / passenger van
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
collision claim frequency ratio
collision exposure distribution
0%
3%
6%
9%
12%
15%
teen to prime-age frequency ratio
exposure, 15-17 year olds
exposure, 35-50 year olds
midsize sports
large 2 door
small pickup
mini 2 door
mini station wagon
small 2 door
mini 4 door
small sports
small 4 door
small station wagon
midsize 2 door
small SUV
large sports
midsize 4 door
midsize station wagon
large pickup
midsize SUV
midsize luxury
large 4 door
large station wagon
very large 4 door
very large pickup
midsize luxury SUV
large luxury
large minivan
large SUV
large luxury SUV
very large minivan
very large SUV
very large luxury
very large luxury SUV
large cargo / passenger van
HLDI Bulletin
|
Vol 31, No.4 : April 2014 5
Table 2 contains the exposure, claims, claim frequencies per 100 insured vehicle years, claim frequency ratio of young
teens over prime-age drivers, and rankings of the ratios by vehicle category. Vehicle categories are listed in order of
claim frequency ratios, from highest to lowest. Vehicle categories with a collision exposure less than 1,000 years for
both teens and prime age are not listed. eir corresponding claim frequency ratios are treated as missing.
Table 2: Collision claim frequency and rank by vehicle type and class, 2000-13 models
Size and class
Exposure Claims Claim frequency Claim frequency rank
Young
teenagers Prime age
Young
teenagers Prime age
Young
teenagers Prime age Ratio
Young
teenagers Prime age Ratio
Midsize sports car 24,099 2,064,485 3,611 120,672 15.0 5.8 2.56 2 19 1
Large 2 door car 1,321 110,13 8 193 7,16 0 14.6 6.5 2.25 3 12 2
Small pickup 46,478 3,814,275 4,745 174,619 10.2 4.6 2.23 17 29 3
Mini 2 door 9,474 663,851 1,181 38,239 12.5 5.8 2.16 10 20 4
Mini station wagon 10,421 667,266 1,402 42,011 13.5 6.3 2.14 7 15 5
Small 2 door 70,946 2,536,637 10,947 185,614 15.4 7.3 2.11 1 3 6
Mini 4 door 13,493 687,845 1,967 48,376 14.6 7.0 2.07 4 6 7
Small sports car 3,011 517,76 3 349 29,820 11.6 5.8 2.01 13 21 8
Small 4 door car 212,180 10,602,592 29,848 741,492 14.1 7. 0 2.01 5 7 9
Small station wagon 39,712 2,87 7,124 4,910 17 7, 971 12.4 6.2 2.00 11 17 10
Midsize 2 door car 27,803 1,590,811 3,910 115,533 14.1 7. 3 1.94 6 4 11
Small SUV 143,023 8,709,522 14,160 451,839 9.9 5.2 1.91 18 25 12
Large sports car 2,610 275,929 321 18,113 12.3 6.6 1.87 12 11 13
Midsize 4 door car 241,481 15,909,213 30,366 1,110,089 12.6 7.0 1.80 9 8 14
Midsize station wagon 11,662 1,114,609 1,128 60,244 9.7 5.4 1.79 19 23 15
Large pickup 109,586 11,611,886 8,998 545,849 8.2 4.7 1.75 24 27 16
Midsize SUV 232,187 17,0 81,737 21,206 896,965 9.1 5.3 1.74 21 24 17
Midsize luxury car 49,109 4,938,998 6,354 368,752 12.9 7. 5 1.73 8 2 18
Large 4 door car 74,821 5,234,229 8,119 338,932 10.9 6.5 1.68 14 13 19
Large station wagon 1,413 194,038 151 13,270 10.7 6.8 1.56 15 9 20
Very large 4 door car 1,546 133,932 141 7,8 3 0 9.1 5.8 1.56 22 18 21
Very large pickup 24,824 3,984,497 1,471 161,769 5.9 4.1 1.46 30 31 22
Midsize luxury SUV 41,017 3,729,786 3,759 238,16 4 9.2 6.4 1.44 20 14 23
Large luxury car 25,156 3,115,619 2,610 225,599 10.4 7.2 1.43 16 5 24
Large minivan 18,117 1,361,382 1,152 61,751 6.4 4.5 1.40 29 30 25
Large SUV 74,195 7,0 4 4,4 8 6 5,081 359,650 6.8 5.1 1.34 28 26 26
Large luxury SUV 13,899 1,815,517 1,115 113,203 8.0 6.2 1.29 25 16 27
Very large minivan 95,893 8,592,433 6,633 491,577 6.9 5.7 1.21 27 22 28
Very large SUV 37,493 2 ,9 0 7,532 2,026 133,235 5.4 4.6 1.18 31 28 29
Very large luxury car 3,181 546,342 270 41,171 8.5 7. 5 1.13 23 1 30
Very large luxury suv 2,055 249,447 147 16,986 7.2 6.8 1.05 26 10 31
Large cargo / pas-
senger van
4,130 656,938 132 22,013 3.2 3.4 0.95 32 32 32
Note: Teen exposure has to be at least 1,000 years to be included in the ratio bar chart.
The Highway Loss Data Institute is a nonprofit public service organization that gathers, processes, and publishes insurance data
on the human and economic losses associated with owning and operating motor vehicles.
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT, DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTED © 2014 by the Highway Loss Data Institute. All rights reserved. Distribu-
tion of this report is restricted. No part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of
the copyright owner. Possession of this publication does not confer the right to print, reprint, publish, copy, sell, file, or use this
material in any manner without the written permission of the copyright owner. Permission is hereby granted to companies that
are supporters of the Highway Loss Data Institute to reprint, copy, or otherwise use this material for their own business purposes,
provided that the copyright notice is clearly visible on the material.
1005 N. Glebe Road, Suite 700
Arlington, VA 22201 USA
tel 703/247-1600
fax 703/247-1595
iihs-hldi.org
Discussion
Collision losses vary by vehicle type and size. is analysis shows that some of the dierences are amplied for young
teen drivers compared with prime-age drivers; how much higher depends on the type and size of the vehicle a teen
operates. Mini and small vehicles tend to have higher collision losses when driven by young teens relative to prime
age drivers. is pattern is consistent with the ndings of the IIHS analysis, which shows that fatally injured young
teen drivers are more likely than adults to have been killed in cars, and they die in small cars more than in any other
type of vehicle. For mini, small, midsize and large passenger cars, the claim frequency ratio was larger for the two-
door version compared with their four-door counterparts.
e results for pickup trucks were also not favorable to young teen drivers. While small pickup truck claim frequen-
cies ranked 17th and 33rd for young teens and prime age drivers respectively, small pickups ended up with the third
highest claim frequency ratio. is was one of the largest changes from the claim frequency rank to the ratio results.
Large and very large pickups also moved up the rankings once the ratio was calculated.
