Rivian produced 19,751 vehicles and delivered 19,248 in Q3 2026 from Normal, Illinois, both records. Revenue rose 38% year over year to $2.155 billion, but Rivian still lost about $913 million. It raised full-year delivery guidance to 67,000–70,000 vehicles.
Rivian's cheaper R2 electric SUV is now its best-selling model, helping offset an industrywide U.S. EV sales slump after the federal EV tax credit ended. But the R2 ramp added costs, and automotive operations still lose money excluding software/services revenue and regulatory credits.
Rivian reported record Q3 production of 19,751 vehicles in Normal, Illinois, delivered 19,248, raised 2026 delivery guidance to 67,000–70,000, and still posted a net loss of about $913 million.
MRivian just built more cars than ever and still lost more than nine hundred million dollars.
CThat's the quarter? The Pantagraph posted the numbers on X from Normal, Illinois.
MNineteen thousand seven hundred fifty-one vehicles. Record production. Record deliveries. Still a giant loss.
CRevenue jumped thirty-eight percent to two point one five billion. They're not dying.
MThe loss per vehicle is about eight thousand four hundred, before credits. That's not a rounding error.
CBecause they're scaling the R2! It's finally the cheaper SUV people wanted. That costs money.
MAnd Green Texan on X says incentives aren't needed. Automakers just need, quote, 'compelling vehicles that people can afford.'
CRivian's R2 starts at fifty-seven thousand nine hundred ninety dollars.
CA forty-five thousand version lands late twenty twenty-seven. That's the market working.
MThen explain the loss. High demand, record deliveries, still negative margins.
CThey're building a factory and a platform at the same time.
CTesla lost money for years too. That's how scaling works.
MTesla had software and regulatory credits. Rivian is still mostly selling metal.
CElectrek's Fred Lambert says R2 demand signals are strong. The Verge called it a rare bright spot in a rough EV market.
MIt's a bright spot that costs nine hundred million a quarter. At some point, growth has to pay.
CUSA Today Cars posted on X that Rivian is the second-most-popular EV brand behind Tesla.
MThat ranking isn't in Rivian's report. I'd take it with a grain of salt.
CEven if it's not in the earnings, the sales trend is real. They're outselling rivals.
MOkay, but the headline is about market share, not the balance sheet.
CMarket share matters. If Rivian is second behind Tesla, buyers are choosing them over Ford and GM.
MFord and GM have gas trucks to fall back on. Rivian has no safety net.
CThat's why they need volume. The R2 is that volume.
MVolume with negative margins. The more they sell, the more they lose.
CNot forever. Costs come down as production scales.
MThey've been scaling for years and still lose eight grand per vehicle.
COkay, but they raised guidance. That's a signal.
MGuidance is not profit.
CThey raised full-year guidance to sixty-seven to seventy thousand vehicles. That's not a company panicking.
MNo, but Green Texan is right that the subsidy era is over. Rivian has to stand on its own.
CAnd it is! Record quarter, more affordable model, higher guidance. What more do you want?
MI want the automotive business to stop losing eight grand per vehicle. That's the entire company.
CYou're treating a heavy capex business like a software app. Cars have factories.
MSo why are other EV makers cutting production? Because they don't have a Rivian-style hit. The market is separating winners and losers.
CExactly. Which means no more blanket incentives. Green Texan nailed it—compelling products win.
MWe both agree with the same post and still found thirty lines of argument.
CThat's the show. But I'm watching Rivian's next two quarters. If they lose less per vehicle, I'm right.
MIf they lose more, I'm right. Deal.
CDifferent corner of the EV world: Jonathan Cecil posted on X that Waymo's next robotaxi platform will be based on Toyota's bZ4X electric SUV.
MNo official word yet. Waymo and Toyota haven't confirmed anything.
CIt makes sense on paper. Waymo needs a purpose-built platform, Toyota needs a robotaxi partner.
MThe bZ4X is a consumer SUV, not a purpose-built robotaxi. You'd want redundant steering and sensors from the start.
CToyota already showed robotaxi concepts, and building on an existing electric platform is cheaper than starting from scratch.
MCheaper until Waymo has to rip out and re-engineer half the car. Look at its Jaguar I-Pace conversions.
CRight, and that's exactly why a dedicated build matters. I'm not saying it's true, just that it's plausible.
MIt's one post with zero official confirmation. I need more than plausible before I hail one.
CFair. But if Toyota and Alphabet do team up, that's a serious robotaxi alliance.
MIf. I'll believe it when the first one pulls up with no driver.