Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206: Insurance Risk Comparison
Gera Risk Comparison Delta (GRCD): -17 pts — Peugeot 206 is riskier by 17 index points. MOT fail-rate difference: -13 pp. From 26,016,787 DVSA MOT tests (2016, OGL v3.0).
Which is riskier to insure — the Volkswagen Polo or the Peugeot 206?
The Peugeot 206 (GVRI 58/100) is 17 index points riskier than the Volkswagen Polo (GVRI 41/100) according to the Gera Risk Comparison Delta — a 13.0 percentage-point difference in MOT fail rates from 2016 DVSA data. UK fleet average GVRI: 37/100. Source: DVSA Anonymised MOT data (2016), OGL v3.0.
Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206: side-by-side risk data (2016)
| Measure | Volkswagen Polo | Peugeot 206 | Difference (A − B) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gera Vehicle Risk Index (GVRI) | 41/100 | 58/100 | -17 pts |
| Risk band | Moderate Risk | High Risk | Peugeot 206 riskier |
| MOT fail rate | 28.5% | 41.5% | -13 pp |
| MOT tests in dataset | 504,691 | 331,122 | — |
| Failed tests | 144,000 | 137,347 | — |
| Avg defect severity | 1.05 | 1.04 | 1=std, 3=dangerous |
| vs UK fleet GVRI (37/100) | +4 pts above avg | +21 pts above avg | — |
GRCD = GVRI(A) − GVRI(B). GVRI = 0.6 × MOT_fail_rate + 0.4 × avg_defect_severity_norm, 0–100. Class-4 (car) normal tests only. N ≥ 30. Source: DVSA MOT 2016, OGL v3.0.
Try the live comparison tool
Compare any two UK cars head-to-head by Gera Risk Comparison Delta.
Car A
Car B
Select two cars to compare their Gera Risk Comparison Delta — computed from 26,016,787 real DVSA MOT tests.
Get insurance quotes for the Volkswagen Polo — lower-risk by 17 GVRI points
The Volkswagen Polo (GVRI 41/100) is 17 index points lower-risk than the Peugeot 206 from DVSA MOT data. GeraSure is building data-driven insurance comparison using real GVRI data. Join the waitlist to see what that means for your premium.
More Volkswagen Polo comparisons
More Peugeot 206 comparisons
Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206 insurance risk: frequently asked questions
- What is the Gera Risk Comparison Delta for the Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206?
- The Gera Risk Comparison Delta (GRCD) for the Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206 is -17 index points, computed from GVRI(Volkswagen Polo) = 41/100 and GVRI(Peugeot 206) = 58/100. The Peugeot 206 is the higher-risk model by 17 GVRI points based on DVSA MOT 2016 data (OGL v3.0).
- What is the Volkswagen Polo GVRI?
- The Volkswagen Polo Gera Vehicle Risk Index (GVRI) is 41/100 (Moderate Risk), with a MOT fail rate of 28.5% from 504,691 class-4 DVSA MOT tests in 2016. The UK fleet average GVRI is 37/100.
- What is the Peugeot 206 GVRI?
- The Peugeot 206 Gera Vehicle Risk Index (GVRI) is 58/100 (High Risk), with a MOT fail rate of 41.5% from 331,122 class-4 DVSA MOT tests in 2016. The UK fleet average GVRI is 37/100.
- Which is cheaper to insure, the Volkswagen Polo or Peugeot 206?
- Based on DVSA MOT data, the Volkswagen Polo (GVRI 41/100, Moderate Risk) has a lower modelled insurance risk than the Peugeot 206 (GVRI 58/100) by 17 index points — a 13.0 percentage-point MOT fail-rate difference. However, actual premiums also depend on driver age, no-claims bonus, postcode, annual mileage and policy type.
- How is the GRCD calculated?
- GRCD = GVRI(Car A) − GVRI(Car B). GVRI = 0.6 × MOT_fail_rate + 0.4 × avg_defect_severity_norm, min-max scaled 0–100. All inputs are from the DVSA Anonymised MOT Test Results dataset (2016, OGL v3.0). Only make+model combinations with N ≥ 30 tests are included. Full methodology is on the Gera Risk Comparison Delta methodology page.
Methodology
The Gera Risk Comparison Delta for Volkswagen Polo vs Peugeot 206 is the difference between their GVRI scores: GRCD = GVRI(Volkswagen Polo) − GVRI(Peugeot 206) = 41 − 58 = -17 pts. GVRI = 0.6 × MOT_fail_rate + 0.4 × avg_defect_severity_norm, min-max scaled 0–100, from DVSA Anonymised MOT Tests (class-4, 2016, OGL v3.0). Full formula and verification steps on the methodology page.
Contains public sector information published by Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) and licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: DVSA Anonymised MOT Test Results — DfT (2016, published 2016).