Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Jeep Compass
Biggest differences: Battery — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 77 kWh, Jeep Compass 96.3 kWh · 0–100 km/h — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 6.7 s, Jeep Compass 8.3 s · Power — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 286 PS, Jeep Compass 231 PS.
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron is an all-electric SUV in the C segment, offering four different drive variants with varying power outputs and ranges.
Jeep Compass
The Jeep Compass is an SUV in the C segment, available with three different powertrain options and battery capacities, offering a range of up to 674 kilometers according to the WLTP cycle.
Profile against the market: Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Jeep Compass
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron45
Jeep CompassLong Range FWD (96,3 kWh)
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron or Jeep Compass — who wins where
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron leads 5 to 3
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmJeep Compass +101 km
- Battery kWhJeep Compass +19.3 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron −2.4 kWh/100 km
- Power PSAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +55 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron −1.6 s
- Top speed km/hNo difference
- DC charging kWAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +15 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Weight ↓ kgAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron −90 kg
- Boot lJeep Compass +15 l
Technical data: Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Jeep Compass
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 45 | Jeep Compass Long Range FWD (96,3 kWh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 573 km | 674 km | Jeep +101 km |
| Battery | 77 kWh | 96.3 kWh | Jeep +19.3 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 15.4 kWh/100 km | 17.8 kWh/100 km | Audi −2.4 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 175 kW | 160 kW | Audi +15 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging ⚠ | 28 min 10–80% | 27 min 20–80% | 1 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 14.3 km/min | 15 km/min | Jeep +0.7 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | — | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 286 PS | 231 PS | Audi +55 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 6.7 s | 8.3 s | Audi −1.6 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 180 km/h | No difference |
| Drivetrain | RWD | FWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2070 kg | 2160 kg | Audi −90 kg |
| Boot | 535 l | 550 l | Jeep +15 l |
| Length | 4588 mm | 4548 mm | Audi +40 mm |
| Width | 1865 mm | 1936 mm | Jeep +71 mm |
| Height | 1614 mm | 1657 mm | Jeep +43 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2764 mm | 2795 mm | Jeep +31 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
Jeep Compass
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
Jeep Compass
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron or Jeep Compass?
The Jeep Compass goes further: 674 km WLTP against the 573 km of the Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron. That is a difference of 101 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron and the Jeep Compass differ?
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron has RWD and 286 PS. The Jeep Compass has FWD and 231 PS.
Which charges faster?
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron accepts up to 175 kW DC, the Jeep Compass up to 160 kW.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron uses less electricity: 15.4 kWh/100 km against 17.8 kWh/100 km in the Jeep Compass. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 360 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.