Mileage Is No Longer Enough: How Battery Data Will Transform Used EV Valuation
The greatest challenge facing the used electric vehicle market is not that batteries degrade. It is that the market still cannot value that degradation fairly, determine what it means for a specific vehicle or decide who should bear the resulting risk.
Traditional vehicle valuation relies on a familiar set of variables: make, model, age, mileage, service history, equipment and body condition. An electric vehicle adds another factor to this equation—the traction battery, a component that simultaneously affects range, everyday usability, rapid-charging capability, safety, future repair costs and residual value.
This change is more fundamental than it may initially appear. The market does not need another dashboard indicator or a single number on a screen. It needs a common language for battery value: verifiable data, comparable results and an interpretation that answers the most important transaction-level question:
What does the condition of this particular battery mean for the value of this particular vehicle today—not in the manufacturer's catalogue?
“Trust in technology does not come from promises, but from objective data. At Voltified, we turn uncertainty in the secondary market into measurable value for business.”
Gabriel Markut, CEO of Voltified Energy
The central argument of this analysis
The used EV market will not mature through vehicle supply alone. It will mature when transaction participants learn to distinguish between three separate issues:
the actual technical condition of the battery;
the quality and reliability of the evidence supporting that condition;
the economic meaning of the result for a particular vehicle and use case.
Without this distinction, good vehicles will be undervalued, weak vehicles will be overvalued and every market participant will apply their own uncertainty discount. This is not merely a technical problem. It is an economic, financial and regulatory one.
The market is not afraid of wear. It is afraid of the unknown
Every used vehicle has experienced some degree of wear. Buyers understand and accept this when they can estimate the consequences. A combustion-engine car with 180,000 kilometres on the odometer is not automatically disqualified if its history is complete, its condition has been verified and its price reflects the expenditure likely to be required in the future.
Traction batteries should be approached in the same way. Degradation alone does not mean that a vehicle is no longer useful. A battery may still provide sufficient range for daily needs and remain economically viable for many years. The problem begins when the seller, buyer, dealer and finance provider do not share a common basis for assessment.
At that point, the price starts to reflect not only the potential cost of wear, but also the cost of not knowing.
This mechanism can be illustrated with a simplified equation:
used EV value = base vehicle value − battery-risk discount − data-uncertainty discount + premium for a reliably verified condition
This is not a formal valuation standard or a ready-made accounting formula. It is a model illustrating the market mechanism. The less reliable the available information, the larger the safety margin sought by a professional buyer, finance provider or seller assuming responsibility for the vehicle.
How uncertainty affects price
A lack of battery data usually leads to a more cautious valuation, a lower purchase offer or a higher safety margin. The cost of this uncertainty is borne by both the current owner and the future buyer.
A single number without a description of the method creates only an illusion of certainty. If nobody knows how the result was obtained, it cannot be meaningfully compared with other vehicles. The risk remains with the customer, dealer and finance provider.
A technical result without an economic interpretation does not explain how the report should affect the vehicle's price. The information exists, but every participant in the transaction must still guess what it means.
A complete, current and auditable report can reduce the uncertainty discount and support a more confident decision. The benefits can be shared between the seller, buyer and institutions supporting the transaction.
Identifying a risk that requires repair also has value. It enables the parties to adjust the price knowingly, plan corrective action or withdraw from the purchase. The risk becomes visible and measurable instead of remaining hidden.
Akerlof described this problem more than half a century ago
In 1970, economist George A. Akerlof published “The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism”. He demonstrated how information asymmetry can weaken the used-car market. A seller generally knows more about a vehicle's quality than a buyer. Because the buyer cannot reliably distinguish a good vehicle from a poor one, they are unwilling to pay the price that the best vehicle truly deserves. Good vehicles are consequently undervalued, while the market begins to favour offers whose quality cannot easily be verified.[1][2]
Electric vehicles add a new dimension to this classic problem. In many transactions, neither side has complete knowledge. The seller may know how the vehicle was used but not understand the condition of individual battery sections. The buyer may see an estimated range but not know how that figure was calculated. A dealer may read a general parameter from the vehicle but be unable to determine whether the figure is comparable with a result obtained from another brand.
This means that information asymmetry in the EV market is not always caused by bad faith. It often results from inadequate tools, inconsistent methodologies and data locked inside different systems.
The best response is not another promise but a trust infrastructure: repeatable testing, transparent methodology, report traceability and clear interpretation.
The traditional vehicle-valuation model has acquired a new variable
Two combustion-engine cars of the same model, age and mileage may differ in the condition of their engines, transmissions or exhaust after-treatment systems. The market has nevertheless learned to use a range of indirect signals: service history, measurements, inspections, test drives, emissions tests and mechanical assessments.
In an electric vehicle, the battery is simultaneously:
an energy-storage system;
an expensive and technically complex component;
a factor affecting performance and charging speed;
a carrier of the vehicle's usage history;
a source of future costs or residual value;
an asset that, depending on its condition, may eventually be repaired, repurposed or recycled.
Two EVs with the same model year, specification and mileage are therefore not necessarily economically equivalent. Their value may differ because of thermal history, charging patterns, the state-of-charge ranges used over time, cell balance, software status, previous repairs and the amount of energy actually available to the driver.
Mileage remains relevant, but it becomes only one variable among many. It is no longer a sufficient proxy for value.
Five layers of battery value
A battery assessment conducted for a transaction should not begin with the question “What is the SoH?” It should begin by defining what kind of answer the recipient needs. We propose separating the analysis into five layers.
The first layer is identity and provenance. It establishes exactly what has been assessed. The VIN, battery variant, test date and software version connect the result to a specific vehicle and reduce the risk of misidentification.
The second layer is technical condition. It answers the question of what is happening inside the system. Relevant information may include faults, voltages, temperatures, parameter spreads and BMS data available for the particular model. This layer can reveal irregularities that ordinary visual inspection cannot detect.
The third layer describes current functional capability. It considers what the battery can deliver today: the amount of energy actually available, its behaviour under load, charging characteristics and any power limitations. It connects technical condition with the vehicle's real-world use.
The fourth layer concerns future risk. It considers history, trends across repeated test results, operating conditions, data completeness and the remaining warranty position. It helps distinguish between two vehicles that perform similarly today but may have different long-term risk profiles.
The fifth layer is economic value. Only at this stage is the technical result translated into the language of pricing, finance and provisions. Relevant factors include the vehicle segment, repair options and costs, market demand, possible alternative use of the battery and the vehicle's intended duty cycle.
This separation prevents fundamentally different concepts from being mixed together. A technically healthy battery does not necessarily guarantee a high vehicle value if the model has weak demand or limited service support. Conversely, a moderately degraded battery need not disqualify a vehicle if it is priced correctly and intended for predictable short-distance use.
Value is therefore not a property of cell chemistry alone. It emerges at the intersection of technology, use case, market conditions and the quality of the evidence.
Why a single SoH figure is not enough
State of Health, or SoH, is often presented as the battery's condition expressed as a percentage of a reference state. It is a useful parameter, but on its own it can create a false impression of precision.
A result of 90% appears unambiguous. In practice, we still need to know:
which definition of SoH was used;
whether the value came directly from the BMS, from a capacity test or from a computational model;
when the test was performed;
the temperature and state of charge at the time of testing;
whether the vehicle had recently undergone a software update or recalibration;
which data were available for the specific model;
the uncertainty associated with the measurement;
whether the single result is consistent with the battery's behaviour in real-world operation.
The same number can mean different things
The statement “SoH 90%” requires clarification. Does it refer to usable energy, nominal capacity, the manufacturer's internal estimate or a result produced by an independent diagnostic model?
The phrase “no faults” does not reveal whether it means merely that there are no active diagnostic codes, or that there are also no historical events and detected anomalies.
A declared “range of 350 km” has limited meaning without information about temperature, speed, route type, state of charge and driving style.
The conclusion “battery in good condition” should identify the assessment criteria and the use case for which the statement is valid.
Likewise, the phrase “battery certificate” should prompt several questions: who performed the test, which method was used, which version of the algorithm produced the result and when was the assessment completed?
This does not mean that SoH is useless. It means that SoH should form part of a broader evidence system. Information becomes more valuable when the result includes a methodology, context, date, scope, vehicle identification and clearly stated limitations.
“In the world of electromobility, data is the new currency—we are building the systems that make it possible to measure and secure that value accurately.”
Tomasz Piwowarski, MSc Eng., CTO of Voltified Energy
From SoH to BHV: technical condition must be translated into economic value
At Voltified Energy, we are developing the concept of Battery Health Value (BHV) as a layer connecting technical battery data with its economic significance. BHV is not intended to replace diagnostics, nor is it currently an official valuation standard. Its purpose is to answer the question that a technical reading alone cannot resolve:
How does the verified condition of a battery affect the risk, usefulness and value of a vehicle in a specific transaction?
SoH and BHV answer different questions
SoH is primarily technical. It addresses the battery's condition relative to a defined reference state. Its output may be a single metric or a set of condition parameters used by a diagnostician, service provider or owner. The credibility of SoH depends on a correct method, suitable data and a clear definition of the result.
BHV is technical and economic. It addresses what the verified battery condition means for the value, risk and usefulness of a particular vehicle. This information is relevant not only to diagnosticians, but also to buyers, sellers, dealers, leasing providers, banks, insurers and fleets. Credible BHV requires reliable diagnostics combined with market data, transparent assumptions and an auditable model.
A BHV-based valuation should not involve arbitrarily attaching one monetary amount to a report. It must consider the vehicle segment, the availability and cost of repairs, warranty terms, real-world usefulness, the quality of the available evidence, potential further use and current market behaviour.
This matters because the same reduction in available energy can have different implications:
in a small urban car driven 30 kilometres per day;
in a family vehicle intended for long-distance travel;
in a delivery vehicle whose daily schedule depends on rapid charging;
in a fleet vehicle operated under a contract with defined availability requirements.
Technical battery condition is a fact. Its economic significance depends on context.
2026: why the valuation challenge is becoming urgent
Between January and August 2026, more than 1.64 million new battery-electric cars were registered in the European Union. BEVs accounted for 21.7% of the new-car market, compared with 15.8% during the corresponding period a year earlier.[3]
By the end of July 2026, Poland had registered 158,365 fully electric passenger and commercial vehicles, including 145,251 passenger cars.[5] Between January and July 2026, approximately 5,500 imported used BEVs were also registered in Poland for the first time. This represented only 1.1% of all used passenger-car imports, but the volume was 41.9% higher than a year earlier.[4]
These figures do not support the claim that Poland has already been “flooded” with used electric vehicles. They point to something more important: the number of transactions in which the market must value a previously unfamiliar category of risk will continue to rise.
Germany remains the largest source of all used vehicles imported into Poland. This is relevant to the future supply of used EVs, but it should not obscure the core issue. Whether a vehicle arrives from Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands or France—or returns from a Polish leasing contract—the market will have to answer the same question: what is a vehicle with this particular battery and this particular history actually worth?
That is why valuation infrastructure matters more today than trying to predict a single “wave of imports”. Vehicles will change owners regardless. The question is whether value will be established through evidence or assumption.
One data gap, many costs
Uncertainty about the battery spreads throughout the entire ecosystem. Each participant sees it differently, but ultimately everyone prices it into the transaction.
An individual customer needs battery data to decide whether to buy a vehicle and what a fair price would be. Without reliable information, the customer may overpay or reject a good vehicle out of fear.
A dealer or used-car retailer must determine the purchase price, preparation cost and resale price. A lack of reliable data leads to a larger price reserve, slower stock turnover and greater complaint risk.
A bank or leasing company uses residual value when assessing collateral and setting finance terms. Battery uncertainty may lead to more conservative assumptions and a higher cost of capital.
An insurer needs a basis for estimating vehicle value, loss severity and repairability. Without suitable data, both claims settlement and risk pricing become more difficult.
A fleet operator must choose the right disposal point and plan the replacement cycle. A lack of information can lead to premature disposal, excessive retention or a failure to capture value that could otherwise have been demonstrated.
A service provider needs evidence to determine whether a repair is justified and how extensive it should be. Without precise diagnostics, there is a greater risk of replacing major assemblies instead of carrying out a targeted repair.
A second-life operator or recycler must determine whether a battery retains utility outside the vehicle. Incorrect classification can destroy potential functional or material value.
This is where diagnostic technology stops being merely a workshop tool and becomes part of the market's financial infrastructure.
Three identical listings, three different assets
Imagine three vehicles of the same model, model year and specification, each with 100,000 kilometres on the odometer.
Vehicle A: no verifiable data
The vehicle drives correctly, displays no warnings and shows a plausible estimated range. However, there is no current report, the assessment method is unknown and there is no reliable information about previous battery repairs. A professional buyer must retain a reserve for unknown risk.
Vehicle B: verified condition and a complete evidence trail
The assessment is linked to the VIN and includes a date, scope, methodology and stable parameters with no material anomalies. The report does not promise fault-free operation, but it narrows the area of uncertainty. Such a vehicle should be capable of defending a higher price than an equivalent example without data.
Vehicle C: an identified deviation
Diagnostics reveal an issue requiring further investigation or repair. This does not automatically mean the end of the battery's useful life. It does, however, allow the parties to define responsibility, estimate the cost of action and adjust the price before the transaction.
All three vehicles may appear almost identical. They differ not only in battery condition, but also in the strength of the evidence on which the parties base their decisions.
What kind of report can genuinely change a decision?
A report has value only when it can be trusted and its limitations can be understood. A document intended for professional transactions should include at least the following elements:
Unambiguous identification of the vehicle and assessment
The VIN, date, place or testing mode, report identifier and tool version.
A description of the data sources
The report should distinguish information obtained from the BMS, measurements from external equipment and outputs generated by analytical models.
The method and scope
There can be no comparability without methodology. The report should state what was actually assessed and which areas could not be evaluated.
Testing conditions
Temperature, state of charge, vehicle state and other relevant factors may affect interpretation.
Technical findings presented in a clear hierarchy
Current parameters, deviations, faults, signals requiring further diagnostics and information about data completeness should be distinguished from one another.
Confidence level and limitations
A credible report should not pretend to know more than the data support. The fact that a particular parameter was unavailable is itself relevant information.
Functional and economic interpretation
The technical result should be translated into implications for range, use, risk, price or the recommended next step.
Auditability and repeatability over time
A later assessment should make it possible to evaluate change instead of merely producing another isolated and incomparable percentage.
An industry article published by autoEXPERT described the solution being developed by Voltified as analysing more than 50 BMS parameters, including cell-voltage differences, temperatures, faults and available historical information. The scope of accessible data depends on the design of the specific make and model. The number of parameters should therefore not be treated as a sales claim in itself. The essential question is whether the selected data answer the right question and whether their interpretation is repeatable.[9]
The battery passport will provide data, but it will not automatically provide a price
Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 introduces a battery passport from 18 February 2027 for the relevant categories of new batteries placed on the market or put into service. Accessed through a QR code, the passport is intended to connect the battery with information concerning areas such as its model, composition, performance, durability, repair, repurposing and recycling. The European Commission has also clarified that the obligation applies to new batteries within the scope of the regulation, rather than retrospectively covering the entire existing vehicle fleet.[6][7]
The passport can improve traceability and access to data, but it will not resolve three problems on its own:
interpretation—technical information alone does not explain how it should affect a vehicle's price;
comparability of older vehicles—existing cars will not receive a complete historical record retrospectively simply because a new regulation takes effect;
change over time—battery value depends on current condition, use and market circumstances, not solely on information recorded at production.
In short: the battery passport is a data layer, not a ready-made valuation mechanism. The market will still need tools capable of combining passport data with current diagnostics, service history and economic analysis.
Three possible market scenarios for 2027–2030
The scenarios below are not numerical forecasts. They illustrate three mechanisms that may shape the European used EV market.
Scenario 1: the market discounts every battery
If access to data remains restricted and results remain difficult to compare, professional buyers will begin to apply cautious discounts to entire groups of vehicles. Good examples will be penalised for uncertainty created by weaker ones. Owners may delay selling, stock rotation will slow and finance providers will adopt conservative residual values.
This is the classic “market for lemons” outcome: insufficient information reduces the value of quality that cannot be proved.
Scenario 2: a Tower of Babel of certificates emerges
The market may become crowded with reports using similar terminology but different methodologies. One result may come from a BMS declaration, another from a short diagnostic readout, a third from a full charge-discharge cycle and a fourth from a statistical model. Each may display a percentage, but the percentages may not be comparable.
In this scenario, the number of documents grows faster than trust. The organisations that succeed will be those that explain their methodology, disclose limitations and enable independent verification.
Scenario 3: the market adopts a shared evidence layer
The most mature scenario involves data interoperability, a minimum reporting scope, method identification and auditability. Technical results remain detailed enough for specialists, while the buyer receives a clear interpretation and the finance provider receives the evidence needed for risk management.
In that environment, a good battery can become a measurable vehicle advantage rather than merely the absence of a problem. Price begins to reflect quality instead of an average fear applied to an entire category.
What should become the market standard?
If Poland and Europe want a liquid used EV market, they need more than one application or one certificate. They need coherent principles. From Voltified Energy's perspective, the following elements are the most important.
1. A minimum dataset without false universality
Every report should contain a common core of information. At the same time, the system must recognise genuine design differences between makes and models. Not every vehicle exposes the same parameters, and not every battery can be assessed through an identical procedure.
2. Separation of source data and interpretation
The recipient should be able to see which information was read directly, which values were calculated and which statements represent expert conclusions. This ensures that improvements to an analytical model do not destroy the value of historical source data.
3. Method versioning
A report without an algorithm or procedure version quickly loses meaning. Methods will evolve, so the market must know which rules were used to produce a given result.
4. A validity date instead of a permanent promise
A battery assessment is a photograph taken at a particular moment. The report should clearly state the testing date and conditions and, for material transactions, explain when an updated assessment may be needed.
5. Two levels of communication
A customer needs a clear explanation of what the result means for vehicle use and price. A specialist, bank or insurer needs the underlying technical data, assessment scope and audit trail. A single simplified score should not replace the professional evidence layer.
6. Independence from the sales channel
The report should retain its meaning whether the vehicle is sold privately, through a dealer, auction platform, authorised retailer, leasing company or fleet. Subject to data-protection rules and the owner's consent, the information should travel with the vehicle.
7. A connection between technical condition and residual value
Banks, leasing companies and fleets need more than a statement that a battery is “good”. They need a model explaining how its condition, uncertainty and expected utility affect the value of the asset over a defined time horizon.
Poland can do more than receive used EVs—it can export a standard of trust
In the electromobility debate, Poland is often described mainly as a market catching up: a recipient of technologies, infrastructure and vehicles designed elsewhere. That perspective overlooks a significant opportunity.
Battery valuation is not a single-country problem. Vehicles cross borders, leasing providers operate across multiple jurisdictions, and manufacturers and trading platforms serve the wider European market. Berlin, Warsaw, Prague, Tallinn and Amsterdam will all need a common way to interpret battery data.
Polish companies can build solutions precisely at the intersection of diagnostics, data, cybersecurity, finance and regulation. We do not need to wait for a complete standard to arrive from elsewhere. We can help create tools that are useful throughout the European Union.
That requires maturity. A European standard is not built through a loud slogan. It is built through:
transparent methodology;
comparable results;
data protection;
cooperation with workshops, dealers and financial institutions;
regulatory compliance;
readiness for external audit;
honest communication of limitations.
What exactly is Voltified Energy building?
Voltified Energy is developing a solution designed to turn fragmented battery data into information that can support real business decisions. It consists of three distinct layers.
Layer 1: acquiring and organising data
The system analyses the data available from a particular vehicle, including BMS parameters, faults, temperatures, voltage differences and the history that can be accessed. The available scope depends on the make, model and vehicle architecture.
Layer 2: technical and qualitative assessment
The objective is not to collect the largest possible number of data points, but to identify signals relevant to condition, consistency and risk. The result must reflect data quality and the boundaries of the method.
Layer 3: Battery Health Value
BHV is intended to connect technical condition with functional and economic value. In practice, this means developing models that can support vehicle valuation, purchase decisions, residual-value assessment, trade-in processes and qualification of a battery for further use.
What should such a system never promise?
Credible diagnostics are not a guarantee of fault-free operation. They cannot predict every event, replace manufacturer procedures or remove the need to inspect the entire vehicle. Nor should they reduce a complex asset to a number stripped of context.
Their purpose is different: to narrow the area of uncertainty enough to support a better decision.
A CEO's perspective: the consequence for the market matters more than the technology itself
When discussing battery diagnostics, it is easy to focus on interfaces, protocols, algorithms and the number of parameters analysed. These are the foundation of the solution, but not its ultimate purpose.
From the perspective of managing Voltified Energy, what matters most is what happens next: whether the owner of a good vehicle receives a fair price; whether the buyer understands the risk; whether a dealer can sell a vehicle without hiding uncertainty; whether a bank can value its collateral correctly; and whether an insurer can distinguish between a battery requiring repair and one that can remain in safe operation.
Technology acquires value only when it improves the quality of decisions outside the laboratory.
Our objective is therefore not to create another impressive percentage. We want to help build a language in which technical data become intelligible to the market—and in which reliable information has measurable value.
The most important change: a good battery will be able to defend its price
Today, the owner of a used EV often cannot prove that the battery in their vehicle is better than average. They may show the displayed range, charging history or a general system estimate, but the buyer may not know whether those indicators can be compared with another vehicle.
If the market creates a reliable evidence layer, that situation will change. Verified battery condition can become a differentiating feature in the same way as a complete service history, accident-free record or documented mileage.
This will have three important consequences:
better vehicles will no longer be discounted automatically alongside weaker ones;
risk will move from vague assumption to an explicit component of valuation;
manufacturers, owners and fleet operators will gain an economic incentive to protect battery condition and maintain reliable documentation.
This mechanism is essential for a circular economy. If good condition has visible value, maintaining, measuring and transferring that value becomes worthwhile. If every battery is placed in one opaque category, the market has no way to reward quality.
Conclusions
The used electric vehicle market does not need a narrative in which every battery represents a threat. Nor does it need assurances that every battery will perform without issue for a fixed number of years.
It needs a more precise approach:
batteries degrade in different ways;
mileage alone does not describe their condition;
SoH alone does not explain their full value;
data without methodology do not create comparability;
the battery passport will improve traceability but will not replace current assessment and valuation;
a credible report can reduce the uncertainty discount;
battery value is both a technical and an economic question.
The most important asset in the used EV market will not be the number of vehicles alone. It will be trust built on data.
That is why the future of used EV valuation begins not with the asking price in an advertisement, but with a question: what do we truly know about the battery on which that price depends?
FAQ: battery valuation and used electric vehicles
Can good battery condition increase the price of a used EV?
Yes, provided that the condition has been confirmed through a credible and current assessment and that the market recognises the report's methodology. In practice, a report is more likely to reduce the uncertainty discount than to add an arbitrary premium. The final price also depends on the model, age, demand, overall vehicle condition and transaction terms.
Does a high SoH mean that the battery is safe and will remain fault-free?
No. SoH describes a selected aspect of condition relative to a defined reference state. It is not a guarantee against faults and does not replace the analysis of diagnostic codes, temperatures, cell balance, history or the condition of the complete vehicle.
Can SoH results from two different tools be compared?
Not always. Tools may use different data sources, definitions, procedures and models. A comparison is meaningful only after reviewing the methodology, testing conditions, data scope and algorithm version.
Why should a bank or leasing company care about battery condition?
Because the battery affects vehicle utility, demand and future price, and therefore also the value of the collateral and the residual value. Better evidence can help differentiate risk instead of applying one conservative adjustment to the entire EV category.
Will the EU battery passport provide a battery's current value?
No. The passport is intended to provide access to specified data about the battery and its life cycle. Establishing current value additionally requires up-to-date diagnostics, interpretation, market data and an economic model.
How does BHV differ from SoH?
SoH relates to the battery's technical condition against a reference state. Battery Health Value is intended to describe the economic meaning of that condition for a specific vehicle and decision—for example, a purchase, trade-in, finance agreement or further application.
Does a battery automatically lose a large share of its value when the warranty expires?
No. The end of the warranty changes the allocation of risk, but it does not determine the battery's condition. The current state, serviceability, use pattern, documentation and a price that properly reflects uncertainty are what matter.
Does a vehicle's country of origin reveal anything about battery condition?
It may provide context concerning climate, charging infrastructure or typical use, but it is not a diagnosis. Two vehicles of the same age and from the same country may have entirely different histories and conditions.
Does a battery report replace a complete vehicle inspection?
No. The battery is one of the most important areas of an EV, but the body, chassis, high-voltage system, brakes, suspension, electronics, repair history, software and documentation must also be checked before purchase.
How long does a battery report remain current?
There is no universal validity period. A report describes the condition at the time of assessment. Its continuing relevance depends on elapsed time, mileage, use and any events occurring after the test. For a material transaction, the assessment should be performed as close as practical to the purchase or trade-in date.
Methodology and limitations
This article combines public market data available as of 4 October 2026, regulatory sources, literature on information asymmetry and Voltified Energy's own technology materials. Registration and import figures describe market scale, but without additional cross-tabulated data they do not reveal the complete structure of used BEVs by country of origin, age and battery condition.
The scenarios for 2027–2030 are qualitative analyses rather than forecasts of volumes, prices or failure rates.
Sources
The Nobel Prize, George A. Akerlof – Facts, information on the analysis of markets with asymmetric information and the example of the used-car market.
George A. Akerlof, The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1970.
ACEA, New car registrations: +0.4% in August 2026 year-to-date; battery-electric 21.7% market share, data for January–August 2026.
PZPM, Automotive Industry, Q3/2026, Central Vehicle Register data concerning first registrations of used vehicles imported into Poland.
PSNM / PZPM, Polish E-Mobility Counter, electric-vehicle fleet data as of the end of July 2026.
European Commission, Frequently Asked Questions on the Batteries Regulation – Battery Passport, information concerning the obligation taking effect on 18 February 2027.
Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning batteries and waste batteries, Article 77 and Annex XIII.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, materials concerning lithium-ion battery ageing mechanisms, diagnostics and lifetime forecasting.
autoEXPERT, Voltified Energy – from diagnostics to battery value, 17 September 2026.
Voltified Energy, Voltified BHV Presentation, internal materials, 2026.
