Mazda CX-30 alternatives & comparisons

Here you can find alternatives to the Mazda CX-30, based on existing comparison pages and popular model matchups. We currently show 6 suitable models as a starting point for your buying decision.

The Mazda CX-30 blends sleek coupe-like lines with the practicality of a compact crossover, feeling more premium than its price tag suggests. It’s a joy to drive for anyone who likes a taut chassis and an interior that treats daily commutes like a small luxury escape.

Mazda CX-30

Alternative models

These models are frequently compared with the Mazda CX-30 and are good next research steps.

from £21,800
S-Cross

Suzuki S-Cross

  • Engine Type : Petrol MHEV
  • Transmission : Manuel, Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 110 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 5.3 - 5.8 L/100km
details

Suzuki S-Cross as a suitable alternative to Mazda CX-30

If you want a small SUV that actually feels like a car, the Mazda CX‑30 wins hearts with taut handling, upscale interior materials and a sharper, more rewarding drive. The Suzuki S‑Cross is the sensible sibling — roomier, cheaper to run and easier on the wallet, making it the smarter pick for families who prefer practicality over pizzazz.

The Suzuki S-Cross is a neatly packaged crossover that puts everyday practicality ahead of showy theatrics, offering a comfortable cabin and predictable handling that suit family life and weekend errands alike. It’s not a headline-grabber, but its sensible packaging, low-key charm and reputation for reliability make it a shrewd choice for buyers who prefer smart value over flash.

Compare directly with Suzuki S-Cross

Quick data check: Suzuki S-Cross

  • considerably more power
  • somewhat cheaper
  • barely more efficient
  • somewhat lighter
from £23,900
Puma

Ford Puma

  • Engine Type : Petrol MHEV, Electric
  • Transmission : Manuel, Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 125 - 168 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 5.4 - 5.9 L/100km
  • Consumption kWh/100km : 13 - 13.7 kWh/100km
  • Electric Range : 404 - 417 km
details

Ford Puma as a suitable alternative to Mazda CX-30

In the tussle between the cheeky Ford Puma and the stylish Mazda CX-30, the Puma serves up playful handling, clever practicality and sharper value, while the CX-30 rewards you with a more premium cabin and composed, grown-up refinement. Choose the Puma for everyday fun and sensible running costs; pick the CX-30 if you want a quieter, classier drive and don’t mind paying a little extra for the nicer finish.

The Ford Puma is a cheeky compact crossover that blends sporty styling with city-friendly practicality, giving drivers a surprisingly fun and composed ride. With clever storage tricks and a lively personality, it’s a smart pick for buyers who want enjoyment without fuss.

Compare directly with Ford Puma

Quick data check: Ford Puma

  • marginally more power
  • very slightly cheaper
  • very slightly more efficient
  • moderately quicker 0–100 km/h
  • a bit lighter
from £22,300
Kamiq

Skoda Kamiq

  • Engine Type : Petrol
  • Transmission : Manuel, Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 95 - 150 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 5.3 - 5.7 L/100km
details

Skoda Kamiq as a suitable alternative to Mazda CX-30

The Mazda CX-30 is the stylish, driver's compact SUV that blends near-premium looks and crisp handling, while the Škoda Kamiq plays the sensible card with clever packaging, a roomier boot and lower running costs. Pick the CX-30 if you want a more emotional, fun-to-drive compact with a nicer interior; choose the Kamiq for everyday practicality, brilliant space use and better value for families and commuters.

The Skoda Kamiq is a neatly packaged city crossover that pairs practical space with unshowy, thoughtful design. It’s easy to live with, economical to run and full of clever details that make daily driving feel intelligently sorted rather than flashy.

Compare directly with Skoda Kamiq

Quick data check: Skoda Kamiq

  • moderately more power
  • marginally more trunk space
  • a bit cheaper
  • barely more efficient
  • marginally quicker 0–100 km/h
  • a bit lighter
from £29,600
Qashqai

Nissan Qashqai

  • Engine Type : Petrol MHEV, Full Hybrid
  • Transmission : Manuel, Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 140 - 205 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 4.5 - 6.8 L/100km
details

Nissan Qashqai as a suitable alternative to Mazda CX-30

The Mazda CX‑30 feels like a premium compact with sharp handling, a beautifully finished interior and a focus on driver enjoyment, while the Nissan Qashqai answers with roomy practicality, comfort and sensible tech for everyday family life. Choose the CX‑30 if you want style and engagement; pick the Qashqai if space, ease and lower running costs top your list — sensible, dependable and a little less demanding.

The Nissan Qashqai blends practical, family-friendly packaging with SUV styling that refuses to shout, making it a sensible and dependable choice for everyday life. It’s comfortable to live with, economical on the road, and neatly equipped enough to feel modern without ever feeling precious — perfect if you want crossover versatility without the drama.

Compare directly with Nissan Qashqai

Quick data check: Nissan Qashqai

  • a bit cheaper
  • marginally more power
  • clearly more efficient
  • only slightly quicker 0–100 km/h
  • barely lighter
  • slightly more trunk space
from £42,800
CX-6e

Mazda CX-6e

  • Engine Type : Electric
  • Transmission : Automatic
  • Drive Type : Rear-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 258 HP
  • Consumption kWh/100km : 18.9 - 19.4 kWh/100km
  • Electric Range : 468 - 484 km
details

Quick data check: Mazda CX-6e

  • clearly cheaper
  • considerably lighter
  • visibly more power
  • very slightly quicker 0–100 km/h
  • barely more trunk space
from £26,400
T-Roc

VW T-Roc

  • Engine Type : Petrol, Petrol MHEV
  • Transmission : Manuel, Automatic
  • Drive Type : Front-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 115 - 150 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 5.5 - 6.3 L/100km
details

VW T-Roc as a suitable alternative to Mazda CX-30

In the competitive world of compact SUVs, the Mazda CX-30 and the VW T-Roc both bring distinct flavors to the table. The Mazda CX-30 is celebrated for its elegant design and engaging driving dynamics, offering a luxurious feel with its high-quality interior and impressive handling. Meanwhile, the VW T-Roc stands out with its bold styling and practical features, appealing to those who prioritize versatility and a slightly higher driving position, making the choice largely dependent on individual priorities and preferences in style and functionality.

The VW T‑Roc feels noticeably more grown‑up than before, with a much nicer cabin, sensible physical controls and a calm, well‑insulated ride that makes long trips comfortable. It’s compact and city‑friendly with practical rear seating, but the sloping roofline reduces rear headroom and tempting options can quickly push the price up, so buyers after maximum space or a sporty feel may want to consider alternatives.

Compare directly with VW T-Roc

Quick data check: VW T-Roc

  • barely cheaper
  • somewhat more power
  • marginally quicker 0–100 km/h
  • very slightly lighter
  • visibly more trunk space
  • marginally more efficient

Direct comparisons

These comparison pages show the Mazda CX-30 head-to-head against similar models.

Mazda CX-30
Suzuki S-Cross
VS
Ford Puma
Mazda CX-30
VS
Mazda CX-30
Skoda Kamiq
VS
Mazda CX-30
Nissan Qashqai
VS
Mazda CX-30
Mazda CX-6e
VS
Mazda CX-30
VW T-Roc
VS

Further pages

DriveDuel uses data analysis and artificial intelligence to evaluate vehicle data and create content. Content is regularly reviewed and improved. The displayed prices are estimates based on German list prices, adjusted to the respective country’s VAT. Country-specific registration taxes are not included. This information is not legally binding.