Buyers shopping for a new SUV in 2026 face average five-year depreciation that erases more than half of the original sticker price, according to Kelley Blue Book data showing the typical model retains roughly 45 percent of MSRP after that span. Against that backdrop, a small group of SUVs consistently scores at the top of both the three-year ALG Residual Value Awards and the five-year KBB Best Resale Value rankings, signaling that their real-world transaction prices hold up far better than the segment average. For anyone financing or leasing at today’s elevated rates, the gap between an average depreciator and a top-tier value holder can amount to thousands of dollars in equity at trade-in time.
Why residual-value awards carry real financial weight in 2026
Depreciation is the single largest cost of vehicle ownership, and the difference between a model that retains 60 percent of its price and one that keeps 45 percent can exceed $8,000 on a $50,000 SUV over five years. That spread matters more when interest rates stay high, because negative equity, where a buyer owes more than the vehicle is worth, becomes harder to escape. Two independent award programs attempt to identify the winners before depreciation hits.
J.D. Power’s ALG program, which focuses on projected resale strength, recognizes models expected to hold the highest percentage of MSRP after three years. The evaluation relies on forecasted wholesale values, brand perception, and segment-level competition. In a separate process, Kelley Blue Book publishes its Best Resale Value Awards using projections from its Official Residual Value Guide, which the company says are built on statistical models drawing from millions of transactions. Together, the two programs offer overlapping but distinct windows into which SUVs are likely to depreciate the least.
The hypothesis is straightforward: SUVs that earn top marks in both the ALG three-year and the KBB five-year evaluations should show smaller negative price swings in actual market data over the following two years than non-awarded competitors in the same size class. Government transaction records offer one way to test that idea. The Bureau of Labor Statistics constructs its CPI used-cars-and-trucks index from underlying transaction data and price estimates, capturing real selling prices rather than asking prices. If award-winning SUVs truly resist depreciation, their price trajectories should diverge visibly from segment averages tracked in that index.
How ALG and KBB scored 300 models to find the strongest SUVs
The 2026 ALG award cycle evaluated roughly 300 models across multiple segments, scoring each on used-vehicle performance, brand outlook, and product competitiveness. That three-pillar approach means a single hot model from a struggling brand can still lose points if the broader lineup drags down resale perception. SUVs that clear this filter tend to share common traits: stable or growing demand in the used market, limited fleet sales that would flood supply, and brand reputations that support premium pricing even after several years of ownership.
KBB’s parallel process layers in a five-year time horizon, which captures a second depreciation curve that often accelerates after warranty coverage expires. The company’s 2026 guidance notes that an average model-year vehicle retains about 45 percent of MSRP at the five-year mark. SUVs that beat that benchmark by double-digit margins, retaining 55 percent or more, earn category and overall awards. The statistical models behind those projections draw on millions of completed sales, giving the forecasts a data foundation that extends well beyond expert opinion.
When a model appears on both the ALG and KBB winner lists, it signals agreement between two methodologies that use different time frames, different weighting schemes, and different proprietary datasets. That convergence is the closest the industry comes to a consensus call on which SUVs will hold their value. Buyers who cross-reference the two lists can narrow the field to a handful of nameplates that have cleared independent scrutiny from both organizations.
Gaps in the data that buyers and analysts still face
Neither ALG nor KBB publishes the raw scoring weights or the specific brand-outlook variables applied to each SUV. Buyers can see which models won, but they cannot reverse-engineer exactly how much weight went to a brand’s strength versus a particular SUV’s sales volume or incentive history. That opacity limits independent verification and makes it difficult to predict whether a model that wins this year will repeat next year if market conditions shift. It also means shoppers must treat the awards as directional signals rather than precise forecasts.
The BLS used-vehicle inflation series tracks aggregate price movements but does not break data down by individual model. That means there is no publicly available government series that lets a researcher compare, month by month, the depreciation curve of a Lexus GX against a Chevrolet Equinox. Private data vendors sell model-level transaction histories, but those datasets are expensive, often lag real-time conditions, and are typically locked behind commercial licenses that limit broader academic or consumer analysis.
Another challenge is that both award programs rely on projections, not guarantees. Forecasts are built on historical patterns in supply, demand, and incentives. A sudden spike in fuel prices can punish larger SUVs, while a surprise redesign or quality issue can undermine a specific model’s resale performance. Likewise, heavy discounting on new inventory can ripple into used values, compressing price gaps that previously favored award-winning vehicles. For buyers, that means even the most data-driven residual rankings should be combined with basic due diligence on reliability, ownership costs, and personal usage needs.
What this means for SUV shoppers in 2026
For a typical buyer, the most practical use of residual-value awards is as a screening tool. Starting with SUVs that appear on both ALG and KBB lists can reduce the risk of steep depreciation, especially for shoppers who expect to trade in or sell within five to seven years. From there, comparing transaction prices, financing offers, and insurance costs helps determine whether a high-resale model still delivers overall value once the purchase deal is factored in.
Leasing customers face a different calculus. Lease payments are largely driven by the gap between the vehicle’s selling price and its projected value at lease-end. Models with strong residuals often carry lower monthly payments for the same MSRP, because the finance company expects the SUV to be worth more when it comes back. In that context, aligning a lease choice with ALG and KBB projections can directly lower out-of-pocket costs, provided the lessee stays within mileage and condition limits.
Used-SUV buyers can also benefit, though in a more nuanced way. A three-year-old model that topped the ALG rankings when new may still command a premium on the used lot, but the same attributes that supported strong projections-durability, demand, and brand reputation-can translate into a safer long-term bet. The key is to weigh the higher purchase price against the likelihood of slower future depreciation and potentially lower maintenance surprises, especially as the SUV ages past its original warranty.
Ultimately, residual-value awards do not replace careful shopping, but they offer a rare, data-informed shortcut in a market where information is often fragmented. By understanding how ALG and KBB build their rankings, recognizing the blind spots in public data, and focusing on long-term equity rather than just monthly payments, SUV buyers in 2026 can make decisions that better protect their wallets long after they drive off the lot.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
