Investor's Corner
Tesla Semi-truck: What will be the ROI and is it worth it?
Elon Musk’s announcement that a Tesla Semi will be arriving as early as September is the first step to what will eventually be a reinvention of an entire industry. We’ve discussed before what, exactly, that means, but given that the man in charge of the Tesla truck program is Jerome Guillen who has a history with Daimler (specifically Freightliner) and large Class 8 semi-trucks, it’s not hard to see where Tesla plans to go with this. That leaves only the question of how far, literally, they plan to take it. In tractor-trailer operations, there are two basic types of freight moving: short-haul and long-haul.
We’re going to look at each of these types of freight hauling and how the return on investment (ROI) for a battery-electric rig (such as that we expect Tesla to unveil) would be. If there is any. We’ll also consider what type of equipment this might entail, in a broad sense, and how that compares to current paradigms in tractor-trailer freight hauling.
Before we dive into that, a few words on what the trucking industry is like are needed. About 69.5 percent of the freight moved in the United States is moved on a commercial truck. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) also says that a staggering 92 percent of prepared foods are moved by trucks and 82.7 percent of agricultural products are moved by truck, as are 65 percent of pharmaceuticals. However you measure it, that’s a lot of goods being moved on highways and surface roads nationally.
Currently, the trucking industry is seeing a lot of change, internally, as technology improves the way that freight hauling operates. The Internet and faster communications, for example, has begun to erode the traditional consignee-broker-hauler paradigm in which someone with goods to haul contacted a freight broker who then contracted a freight hauler to move the goods, skimming a percentage off the top for the connection. The middleman is often cut out in today’s trucking, with many trucking companies having load brokers on staff.
Electronics and global positioning have also changed how trucks operate, with computers more efficiently organizing load and truck movements to minimize empty movement. The USDOT says that about 29 percent of all truck movement is pulling an empty trailer to or from a freight drop-off point, costing about $30 billion annually. That number, while high, has been dropping for some time and drops exponentially as networks of computers get more efficient at organizing trucking and trucking companies consolidate into larger and larger fleets.
Finally, we should note that the longer the average trip (load to delivery) is for a tractor-trailer, the faster the truck’s ROI for the owner. Shorter hauls have higher per-mile maintenance costs than do longer hauls. Even discounting the cost of fuel, that becomes true as equipment maintenance costs beyond engine and fuel are still higher with shorter distances. There are several reasons for this, including how often brakes are used, how much time is spent not working (idling or sitting), and higher incidences of accidents. To name a few. Many short-haul operations are undertaken on less than ideal roads and in areas where any kind of breakdown, including a flat tire, can mean hours wasted waiting for repair.
Knowing those things, we can look at potential ROI for both short-haul and long-haul Tesla electric semi-trucks.
Short Haul
Conventionally, short-haul operations are defined as being tractor-trailer shipments moving 250 miles or less and long-haul is defined as being those same types of shipments moving more than 250 miles. Each of these has sub-categories, of course, but in the main, those are the two major markets for large Class 8 semi-trucks pulling freight. It should be noted that the overlap between short-haul and long-haul is large, as many short-haul shipments are being carried to a distribution location where it’s reassembled for longer distance hauling.
Of the two operations, short-haul has the most diversity in terms of machines used and types of freight carried. It’s in this category that we find items as aggregate as grain freshly harvested from fields to stones to specialized equipment being carried. Sometimes by the same truck and driver over the course of a year’s work. It’s also in this category that we find specialized rigs meant for entering pit mines, climbing steep grades on primitive dirt roads, moving overweight and outsized items, and so forth. For the most part, trucks in this category are “day cabs” meaning they have no sleeper unit attached for the driver to use as a rest quarters when not at the wheel.
So far, the electrified Class 8 vehicles we’ve seen actually enter the market have nearly all fallen into the short-haul category. These have included battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and hybrid units working as “yard dogs” moving trailers around a dock area, as portage trucks moving containers and freight out of port to staging areas or local distribution centers, and local area urban and suburban delivery vehicles. Currently, there is a large push in California to make all port vehicles (including container-moving trucks) as zero-emissions as possible.
The good news for battery-electric truck makers and those who aspire to become them is that, according to the USDOT, about half of all of the shipments (by value) is moved less than 250 miles. That accounts for about 80 percent of the weight being moved around the country. The bad news is that in this segment, less is paid per ton for that freight to be moved and, according to the American Transportation Research Institute, this segment only accounts for about 25 percent of the trucks on the road. Equipment age also tends to be higher in this category, with trucks being used for more years (and generally fewer miles) than compared to long-haul trucks.
In terms of cost, outside of maintenance, the most expensive items for a tractor-trailer, whether short- or long-haul, are fuel (38 percent), driver wages and benefits (34 percent), and truck-trailer lease payments and insurance (14 percent). These costs are about the same no matter what the truck is used for in most conventional operations, short-haul or long. Maintenance is about six percent higher in short-haul operations when compared to long-haul and insurance is usually a bit higher(1.5 percent), but not by so much that it can’t be averaged between them without skewing the numbers.
We can safely assume that a battery-electric semi-truck will have a higher price tag than its diesel-powered counterpart, which itself averages about $150,000 new. How much larger the electric truck would be is mostly conjecture, but we can probably be considered conservative to say it’s up-front costs will be at least 50 percent higher ($225,000) due to the expense of the batteries. Morgan Stanley’s report on electric and autonomous trucking assumed $75,000 for 500 kWh of battery storage, translating to roughly 150 or so miles of range in a fully loaded (80,000 pound) semi-truck. Given the current lithium crunch and the likelihood that economies of scale will take a lot of time to come to fruition, it’s easy to predict that more than half the Tesla Semi’s cost would be in batteries should it aim for a 250-mile range.
Over time, of course, that larger up-front price tag would be returned with fuel savings. In short-haul operations, about four years (250,000 miles) would be required to pay off $100,000 in battery premium with fuel savings. There are, however, other costs that would rise with the higher price of the rig. A higher-priced rig will have higher lease payments and higher insurance costs for replacement. This would stretch the ROI of the short-haul truck, by roughly another year, making it a five year investment return. If the truck stays in operation for the typical usage cycle in this segment, however, that would mean the truck pays for itself in about two thirds (70 percent) of its intended lifespan. Some percentage of the maintenance would also be lower in cost due to the nature of the electric truck, but much of it (tires, drivetrain, brakes, etc.) remains stagnant, further whittling at that ROI timeframe.
By and large, most forward-thinking fleet managers would jump at that. With one point of caution: by nature of their business and the long timeframes involved, most fleet managers are averse to change on a large scale. A few EV trucks here and there to prove out the technology and make the suits and ties happy are one thing. Jumping whole hog into the change is quite another. It would take some time (likely years) for fleet managers of short-haul fleets to decide that battery-electric trucks (or any type of unconventional powertrain) is a healthy decision. That, more than anything, will be the major delay towards adoption of something like a Tesla Semi.
Long-Haul Operations
Assuming that a Tesla Semi could be capable of hauling freight for 500-1,000 miles on a charge (the average long-haul trip is 600 miles per day), it would jump into a segment of trucking that accounts for more ton-miles than any other type of freight movement and that is growing faster than any other segment of commercial transportation in terms of both value and weight being moved. Further, the average turnover for a tractor in the long-haul business is 6.6 years (ATRI numbers) and the average mileage is over 110,000 miles per year per truck. ROI is typically faster as well, given the lower costs versus the miles driven.
Coming up with an ROI for a long-haul electric semi-truck is much trickier here and may be nearly impossible without knowing more about the EV truck to be used. At this stage, a battery-electric Tesla Semi would be nearly impossible for long-haul given the size and thus weight of the batteries required. So something involving very fast charging, battery swapping, or similar would be required. That adds costs to the equation that we cannot easily quantify without knowing what those logistics are.
What we can easily project is that the cost-benefit for a Tesla Semi in a long-haul scenario would not likely be nearly as compelling as it is for a short-haul fleet manager. A typical over-the-road truck sees about a million miles during its lifespan with a cost of about $400,000 in fuel and $100,000 in maintenance (ATRI) during that time. Most fleets own the truck for about seventy percent that time (700,000 miles), on average. So the cost of a truck, in terms of purchase price, fuel, and maintenance over its expected fleet lifespan is about half a million dollars ($280,000 fuel + $70,000 maintenance + $150,000 purchase = $500,000). This might begin to look very close to break even on a higher-priced EV truck by comparison, which would very likely save on fuel but would have higher up-front costs in balance. Further, those fuel savings might not be as good given the likelihood that logistics like battery swapping or more frequent stops for plugging in would be required.
Conclusion
A Tesla Semi would likely have a good return on investment for any fleet manager who is willing to look over the long-term and consider the cost-benefit. For the short-haul manager, however, the potential ROI is far more provocative than it would be for the long-haul manager. We can see a clear business case for a Tesla Semi for a large proportion of the short-haul industry, though we do caution that it will likely take some time for those in the industry to cast anything but a dubious eye towards an unconventional powertrain.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.
Elon Musk
FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day
FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.
The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.
The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.
A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.
The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.
Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.
As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.
Investor's Corner
Elon Musk drops a Thanksgiving hint about Starship’s biggest test yet
Elon Musk says Starship Flight 15 will try to catch the ship itself, a first.
Elon Musk says SpaceX’s next Starship flight will try something nobody has done before, by catching the ship itself. Speaking to roughly 2,000 people at the X Takeover event at Giga Texas on Saturday, Musk said Flight 15 is about four to six weeks away and “probably launches a little bit before Thanksgiving, is my guess.”
That is a slip from earlier reporting, which had pointed to a launch as early as October 19. Musk explained why the date keeps moving. “We’re making a bunch of improvements to the rocket between every flight,” he said, adding that there are often hundreds, sometimes thousands, of small changes. This time the list is short, “but some of them take a fair bit of work and we’ve got to go inside the tank to make some of these changes.”
“We’re going to try to catch the ship, which is a super big deal,” Musk said. “If we do so, that’ll be the first time that there’s been full recovery of an orbital class rocket.” SpaceX has already caught the Super Heavy booster with the tower’s mechanical arms, and has talked about catching the ship since late 2025, but the upper stage has never been caught.
Musk also laid out what comes after. “The next big milestone would be to refly both the booster and the ship,” he said, describing a Flight 16 where “all parts of an orbital rocket are reflown.”
The reason SpaceX wants this comes down to cost and cadence. Every Starship ship so far has ended its flight in the ocean, and SpaceX expects most of those water landings to end in fireballs. A ship that returns to Starbase intact can be inspected and flown again. SpaceX’s IPO filing, says Starship V3 is designed to deliver 100 metric tons to orbit in a fully reusable configuration, that SpaceX aims to cut the cost to reach orbit by 99% or more versus the historical average, and that tower catches should allow “multiple launches per day.”
The payoff goes beyond cheaper launches. The next generation Starlink V3 satellites are too large for Falcon 9 and can only fly on Starship, which can carry up to 60 per flight. Flight 14 on September 28 deployed the first 26 of them after Starship reached orbit despite an early engine shutdown, as Teslarati reported. Musk blamed engine computer software, and said the heat shield “was extremely robust,” which he claimed in August had solved Starship’s biggest challenge.
NASA’s Moon plans depend on the same capability. NASA’s inspector general has described a lander mission that needs a propellant depot in low Earth orbit and more than 10 tanker flights, with SpaceX targeting one tanker launch every six days. That schedule only works if ships and boosters come back fast and fly again. Also, ship to ship propellant transfer has not been attempted yet.
One interesting hurdle yet to be explored is bringing the ship back to the launch site, with reentry over land, which will undoubtedly come with a lot of aviation safety reviews.

