Waymo Safety Impact

Making roads safer

The trust and safety of the communities where we operate is paramount to us. That’s why we’re voluntarily sharing our safety data.

The data to date indicate the Waymo Driver is already making roads safer in the places where we currently operate. Specifically, the data below demonstrate that the Waymo Driver is better than humans at avoiding crashes that result in injuries — both of any severity and specifically serious ones — as well as those that lead to airbag deployments.

This hub compares the Waymo Driver’s Rider-Only (RO) crash rates to human crash benchmarks for surface streets. It leverages best practices in safety impact analysis and builds upon dozens of Waymo’s safety publications, providing an unprecedented level of transparency within the autonomous driving industry. By sharing our data and methodologies, we also invite you to join us as we push for advancements in measuring safety impact.

The data displayed on this webpage undergo consistent updates aligned with NHTSA’s Standing General Order (SGO) reporting timelines.

Rider-only (RO) miles driven

Through December 2025, Waymo has driven 170.7M rider-only miles without a human driver

Waymo Driver compared to human benchmarks

Compared to an average human driver over the same distance in our operating cities, the Waymo Driver had

Overall crash reduction

92% Fewer serious injury or worse crashes (35 fewer)

83% Fewer airbag deployment in any vehicle crashes (230 fewer)

82% Fewer injury-causing crashes (544 fewer)

Crash reductions involving injuries to Vulnerable Road Users

92% Fewer pedestrian crashes with injuries (62 fewer)

85% Fewer cyclist crashes with Injuries (39 fewer)

81% Fewer motorcycle crashes with injuries (25 fewer)

Waymo Driver compared to human benchmarks

Airbag deployments, any injury

The graphs below show how many fewer incidents (crashes) per million miles (IPMM) Waymo had compared to human drivers with the benchmark crash rate. The error bars represent 95% confidence intervals for the IPMM estimate.

The reductions are shown for all locations combined and separately for individual cities.

The comparisons in Atlanta are not shown here due to Waymo’s limited mileage, which means the results are not yet statistically significant.

Serious Injury or Worse Crash Rates

| Location | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Waymo | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Benchmark | |---|---|---| | All Locations | 0.02 | 0.22 | | Phoenix | 0.01 | 0.10 | | San Francisco | 0.04 | 0.43 | | Los Angeles | 0.00 | 0.15 | | Austin | 0.00 | 0.18 |

Any-Injury-Reported Crash Rates

| Location | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Waymo | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Benchmark | |---|---|---| | All Locations | 0.71 | 3.90 | | Phoenix | 0.58 | 1.98 | | San Francisco | 0.77 | 7.47 | | Los Angeles | 0.90 | 2.50 | | Austin | 0.65 | 3.34 |

Airbag Deployment in Any Vehicle Crash Rates

| Location | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Waymo | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Benchmark | |---|---|---| | All Locations | 0.28 | 1.63 | | Phoenix | 0.28 | 1.35 | | San Francisco | 0.32 | 2.11 | | Los Angeles | 0.21 | 1.23 | | Austin | 0.37 | 2.37 |

Airbag Deployment in Waymo Vehicle Crash Rate

| Location | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Waymo | Incidents per Million Miles (IPMM), Benchmark | |---|---|---| | All Locations | 0.05 | 1.12 | | Phoenix | 0.06 | 0.94 | | San Francisco | 0.06 | 1.29 | | Los Angeles | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Austin | 0.09 | 2.00 |

Waymo Driver compared to human benchmarks

Percent difference in crash rate

The graphs below show the percent difference between the Waymo and human benchmark crash rates by location, with 95% confidence intervals. A negative number means the Waymo Driver reduced crashes compared to the human driver. Confidence intervals that do not cross 0% mean the percent difference is statistically significant.

The percent reductions and confidence intervals show that the Waymo Driver has a large, statistically significant, reduction in crash rates compared to the human benchmark across many outcomes and locations.

The comparisons in Atlanta are not shown here due to Waymo’s limited mileage, which means the results are not yet statistically significant.

Waymo crash rate percent difference to benchmark

| Location | Percent Difference to Benchmark, Airbag Deployment in Any Vehicle | Percent Difference to Benchmark, Airbag Deployment in Waymo Vehicle | Percent Difference to Benchmark, Any Injury Reported | Percent Difference to Benchmark, Serious Injury or Worse | |---|---|---|---|---| | All Locations | -82.72% | -95.69% | -81.69% | -92.11% | | Phoenix | -79.51% | -93.82% | -70.61% | -86.11% | | San Francisco | -84.97% | -95.14% | -89.74% | -91.36% | | Los Angeles | -82.80% | -100.00% | -64.03% | -100.00% | | Austin | -84.26% | -95.33% | -80.45% | -100.00% |

Percent of Waymo Driver collisions with <1mph change in velocity

(Delta-V <1mph)

Delta-V measures the change in velocity during a collision. It is another way to investigate crash severity and is one of the most important predictors of injury risk in vehicle-to-vehicle crashes.

This graph shows the percentage of SGO-reported crashes where the maximum Delta-V (from either the Waymo vehicle or other vehicle) was less than 1 mph—meaning the collision resulted in a <1mph change in velocity. A Delta-V less than 1 mph usually results in only minor damage (dents and scratches). This graph includes vehicle-to-vehicle and single vehicle crashes, but not crashes with pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists.

Delta-V is estimated using an impulse-momentum crash model with inputs measured by the Waymo vehicle’s sensor system. Note: Comparable human benchmarks for <1mph Delta-V are currently not possible to estimate with high certainty.

% of SGO Collisions with less than 1mph change in velocity (Delta-V <1mph)

| Location | % Crashes <1 mph Delta-v | |---|---| | ALL AREAS | 43% | | SF | 45% | | PHX | 40% | | LA | 42% | | ATX | 43% |

Waymo Driver compared to human benchmarks by crash type

These graphs show how many fewer RO (rider-only) crashes Waymo had (regardless of who was at fault) compared to human drivers with the average benchmark crash rate if they were to drive the same distance in the areas we operate. Crashes were classified into one of 11 crash types, and are representative of all locations. Data are available by individual cities in the download section.

Bars showing a number percent difference are statistically significant.

Airbag Deployment in Any Vehicle Crashes

| Crash Type Group | Events (Benchmark) | Events (Waymo) | |---|---|---| | V2V LATERAL | 15 | 1 (-93%) | | V2V INTERSECTION | 155 | 8 (-95%) | | V2V HEAD-ON | 7 | 6 | | V2V F2R | 35 | 21 (-41%) | | SINGLE VEHICLE | 33 | 0 (-100%) | | SECONDARY CRASH | 19 | 11 | | ALL OTHERS | 6 | 1 (-85%) |

Any-Injury-Reported Crashes

| Crash Type Group | Events (Benchmark) | Events (Waymo) | |---|---|---| | V2V LATERAL | 44 | 10 (-78%) | | V2V INTERSECTION | 262 | 10 (-96%) | | V2V F2R | 102 | 57 (-44%) | | SINGLE VEHICLE | 46 | 2 (-96%) | | SECONDARY CRASH | 35 | 11 (-69%) | | PEDESTRIAN | 66 | 5 (-92%) | | MOTORCYCLE | 31 | 6 (-81%) | | CYCLIST | 46 | 7 (-85%) | | ALL OTHERS | 13 | 3 (-78%) |

David Zuby, Chief Research Officer, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)By making detailed information about crashes and miles driven publicly accessible, Waymo’s transparency will not only support independent research but foster public trust. We hope other companies developing and deploying automated driving systems follow suit.

Methodology

Methodology

Comparing autonomous vehicle and human performance

Despite the public availability of crash data for both human-driven and autonomous vehicles, drawing meaningful comparisons between the two is challenging.