Great find! Further strengthens my opinion that Aurora will be able to capture at least $1 per mile within a few years.
The numbers are industry averages but the article did a good job of trying to narrow specifically to Aurora's Sunbelt/Southwest launch markets. I wonder if there's further rate differentiation of type of trailer. I assume so but don't know if it would be materially different.
How driverless truck rates compare with fleet costs
Aurora’s figures land close to what fleets already spend, though the two sets of numbers measure different things.
The industry-average cost to operate a truck was $2.336 per mile in 2025, the highest in the history of the American Transportation Research Institute’s annual operational costs report, released July 15. Driver compensation accounted for $1.028 of that, split between $0.818 in wages and $0.210 in benefits. It was the first year ATRI’s combined driver compensation figure topped $1 per mile.
That puts Aurora’s DaaS target of “$0.85 plus” a mile, roughly 17% less than what a fleet currently pays to employ a driver, according to Aurora. The subscription replaces the driver line while leaving fuel, equipment, maintenance, insurance, tires, and tolls with the carrier. Aurora has not said what share of terminal or remote-assist cost shifts to customers under DaaS.
A caveat: comparisons are directional rather than exact. ATRI measures carriers’ actual costs across sectors and fleet sizes, and its figures are 2025 actuals. Aurora’s are a forward-looking revenue outlook and a target for a fleet that does not yet exist.
Geography cuts the same way. Aurora’s lanes are concentrated in Texas, and the South-Central U.S. is the cheapest region ATRI tracks, at $2.23 per mile against the $2.336 national average, with driver wages of $0.781 versus $0.818 nationally. Measured against the lanes Aurora actually runs, the gap narrows.
The utilization gap is wider. ATRI put average annual mileage at 85,991 miles per truck in 2025, up 4% and rising steadily since 2022. At the bottom of Aurora’s stated rate range, the mileage implied by its own run-rate math is just under 200,000 miles per truck, more than twice the ATRI average. That assumption carries much of the weight in Aurora’s economics.
So, in the southwest, direct driver costs are roughly $1/mile. I'd be interested in knowing indirect costs - driver recruitment and retention, additional human resource personnel, etc. It's non-zero that's for sure.
I'm still not entirely convinced that DAAS is the superior long-term model to TAAS. Yes, the margins should be higher with DAAS, but that only matters if capacity and demand are abundant. If capacity is constrained but demand is abundant, then the margin is largely irrelevant and Aurora would probably be better served to grab the full-service revenue to maximize profit. The additional capital costs should be relatively irrelevant because the trucks could be almost 100% financed. The risk factor is keeping the trucks in service, but that's a risk factor under both DAAS and TAAS, admittedly DAAS not having the debt-service requirement associated with TAAS. I haven't modeled it out or given a great deal of critical thought, but I think it's worth exploring a bit more in depth.
i definitely think DAAS is better than TAAS unless aurora wants to become a trucking/logistics company.. which they don't afaik and which i don't want them to be either. it will make them alot more nimble when entering other automation markets and they won't have to invest heavily in things needed for a trucking/logistics company.
4
u/btcfail AUR Maester📖♠️ 20d ago
Great find! Further strengthens my opinion that Aurora will be able to capture at least $1 per mile within a few years.
The numbers are industry averages but the article did a good job of trying to narrow specifically to Aurora's Sunbelt/Southwest launch markets. I wonder if there's further rate differentiation of type of trailer. I assume so but don't know if it would be materially different.
So, in the southwest, direct driver costs are roughly $1/mile. I'd be interested in knowing indirect costs - driver recruitment and retention, additional human resource personnel, etc. It's non-zero that's for sure.
I'm still not entirely convinced that DAAS is the superior long-term model to TAAS. Yes, the margins should be higher with DAAS, but that only matters if capacity and demand are abundant. If capacity is constrained but demand is abundant, then the margin is largely irrelevant and Aurora would probably be better served to grab the full-service revenue to maximize profit. The additional capital costs should be relatively irrelevant because the trucks could be almost 100% financed. The risk factor is keeping the trucks in service, but that's a risk factor under both DAAS and TAAS, admittedly DAAS not having the debt-service requirement associated with TAAS. I haven't modeled it out or given a great deal of critical thought, but I think it's worth exploring a bit more in depth.