The safety benefits of FSD (Supervised) are clear when compared to manually driven Tesla vehicles with and without active safety features. This is the most direct and statistically valid comparison setup since it is being made within the same fleet of vehicles using the same telemetry pipelines.
Additionally, Tesla vehicles share the road with many road users in non-Tesla vehicles. To that end, it is prudent to assess the safety of FSD (Supervised) against the general safety of roadways in the U.S. A quantifiable means by which to do this is to estimate the U.S. collision rate using data published by the U.S. government, which is the best available source. To establish a baseline U.S. average, Tesla used U.S. government data, as explained below, to estimate for total miles traveled (numerator) and total vehicles involved in a collision (denominator).
The U.S. government publishes several data sources for consideration. For total miles traveled (numerator), a commonly used source for research is the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) vehicle miles traveled (VMT) annual reports (with the most recent publication being for calendar year 2023). For total vehicles involved in a collision (denominator), Tesla looked to three sampling and reporting systems: the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Crash Report Sampling System (CRSS), which captures police-reported incident rates nationwide; second, NHTSA’s Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS), which samples police-reported collisions where at least one passenger vehicle was towed from the crash scene; and third, NHTSA’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), which measures fatality events nationwide. Among these sampling and reporting systems, the CISS primarily involves collision severities that most closely align with Tesla’s approach to tracking major collisions, because the CISS captures collisions where at least one passenger vehicle was towed and is not limited by injury outcomes. In contrast, CRSS primarily captures incidents where neither airbags nor other restraints may have deployed (e.g., approximately 71.7% of crashes in the CRSS for 2023 are property damage only, whereas deployment events are more closely associated with higher severity impacts with greater potential for injury). In further contrast, the FARS is specific to fatal collisions and primarily captures a subset of the highest severity deployment incidents and certain non-deployment or difficult-to-detect incidents involving certain object types.
Based on all these considerations, to calculate the major collision “U.S. average” estimate, Tesla divided the FHWA vehicle miles traveled (from all vehicles reported) by the estimated total count of vehicles involved in CISS-reported incidents (see the total value in Table 2 of the CISS reports).
The CISS and FHWA databases do not contain highway and non-highway breakdowns that are directly comparable to Tesla’s data. Therefore, to estimate a baseline for the “U.S. average” collision rate breakdown by highway and non-highway, Tesla computed the relative fraction of the overall collision rate seen in the manually driven Tesla fleet for both highway and non-highway driving. Tesla then applied those fractions to the major collision “U.S. average” rate to estimate the “U.S. average” collision rate for highway and non-highway driving. Tesla applied the same method to estimate the “U.S. average” rate for “Minor Collisions” by using the ratio of minor collisions to major collisions in the Tesla manually driven fleet. The Tesla manually driven fleet is a reasonably representative approximation for these fractions, due to its size (over three million U.S. vehicles), geographic distribution (presence in every U.S. state), owner makeup (Model Y was the second bestselling non-pickup in the U.S. in 2023-2024) and activity (over 30 billion miles annually in the U.S.).
Tesla appreciates that any adjustments to data can potentially introduce inadvertent noise and bias. To preserve the accuracy and integrity of the methodology used to calculate the U.S. average and compare it to Tesla collision rates, Tesla purposely limited any processing or filtering of data to be strictly minimal and only as necessary, as outlined above. Even still, the methodology involves necessary and unavoidable assumptions due to differences in data collection methods between Tesla’s data and publicly available data published by the U.S. government. These assumptions may contain limitations with respect to reporting criteria, unreported incident estimations (e.g., NHTSA estimates that 60% of property damage-only crashes and 32% of injury crashes are not reported to police [Blincoe et al. 2023]), federal database sample size and fleet distribution. Some of these limitations may skew the U.S. average calculation higher or lower than presented in the Vehicle Safety Report. Notwithstanding these limitations, the magnitude of improved real-world safety using FSD (Supervised) is clear and undeniable. This is plainly evident in the most direct comparison between Tesla vehicles using FSD (Supervised) and those being driven manually. The U.S. average estimate (even with its limitations) simply reinforces that conclusion.