GWM ORA 5 vs Volvo ES90

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

We hold no ANCAP data for the GWM ORA 5. ANCAP's published ratings include no record for the Volvo ES90. With no pair of ratings to compare, the active-safety features in the spec table above are the fairer comparison.

Recalls on our record

A recall covers the builds its notice lists, not every car of a model. Check your VIN at vehiclerecalls.gov.au.

Charging times

How long each takes to charge, from a household power point to a DC fast charger, estimated from battery size and the car's own maximum charge rates.

Feature Showdown

The GWM ORA 5 features a 14.6-inch touchscreen paired with a 10.3-inch digital dash, while the Volvo ES90 gets a 14.5-inch display and 9-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The GWM ORA 5 stands out with V2L — features our data doesn't list for the Volvo ES90. The Volvo ES90 counters with head-up display, wireless charging, panoramic roof, heated front seats, power tailgate, Harman Kardon audio and ambient lighting. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the GWM ORA 5 gets synthetic leather upholstery while the Volvo ES90 offers nordico fabric. Climate control is 1-zone in the GWM ORA 5 and 4-zone in the Volvo ES90.

Drivetrain

The GWM ORA 5 uses a Electric producing 150kW and 260Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 8 seconds.

The Volvo ES90 responds with a Electric making 245kW and 480Nm, paired to a single-speed driving the rear wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 6.6 seconds.

The Volvo ES90 has the clear power advantage at 245kW vs 150kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Volvo ES90 is 1.4s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Battery: 58.3kWh (GWM ORA 5) vs 92kWh (Volvo ES90), giving WLTP ranges of 435km and 554km. DC fast charging peaks at 120kW (GWM ORA 5) vs 300kW (Volvo ES90).

Space & Comfort

The GWM ORA 5 measures 4,471mm long on a 2,720mm wheelbase, 529mm shorter than the Volvo ES90 at 5,000mm (3,102mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Volvo ES90 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 362L in the GWM ORA 5 and 424L in the Volvo ES90, giving the Volvo ES90 a 62L advantage.

For towing, the Volvo ES90 leads with a 1,600kg braked capacity vs 750kg. That 850kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Neither U-turns in one sweep on a 7 m local street (both need a three-point turn); the GWM ORA 5's turning circle is 1.1 m tighter, 10.9 m against 12.0 m kerb to kerb. The street estimate is indicative, worked from the published turning circles.

Cost to own

At 15,000 km a year, electricity for the GWM ORA 5 costs about $773 a year (16.1 kWh/100km) and electricity for the Volvo ES90 about $826 a year (17.2 kWh/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $53 a year less for the GWM ORA 5.

Warranty: 7 years / unlimited km (GWM ORA 5) and 5 years / unlimited km (Volvo ES90).

Where each one leads

The GWM ORA 5: the longer warranty (7 years against 5) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($773 a year against $826).

The Volvo ES90: more power (245kW against 150kW), the bigger boot with the seats up (424L against 362L) and the higher braked towing limit (1,600kg against 750kg).

The Verdict

GWM ORA 5 scores higher, 72 vs 69

The GWM ORA 5 scores 72 to the Volvo ES90's 69 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 4 of the 11 spec rows that separate them. The biggest gaps: performance (Volvo ES90 ahead by 25 points), value (GWM ORA 5 ahead by 23 points), energy efficiency (GWM ORA 5 ahead by 7 points). At 15,000 km a year, electricity for the GWM ORA 5 costs about $53 less (16.1 kWh/100km against 17.2 kWh/100km, at 32c a kWh). Boot space with the seats up: 362L in the GWM ORA 5, 424L in the Volvo ES90. Warranty: 7 years on the GWM ORA 5, 5 on the Volvo ES90.

Common questions