Fleet telematics is being adopted for connected-vehicle visibility, driver safety, fuel management and cost control. The available evidence combines 2024 surveys with field studies and company case reports from the United States, United Kingdom, Belgium and California, so results must be read in their stated populations and periods.
Key Fleet Telematics Statistics
The most quotable fleet telematics figures cover adoption, data use and measured operating outcomes:
- 42% of smaller companies and 54% of the largest companies reported connected fleets through a telematic tool in 2024 globally.
- Telematics penetration exceeded 50% in Brazil, Mexico, Peru and the United Kingdom in 2024.
- New Zealand and Canada reported the lowest connected-fleet rate at 30% in 2024.
- 61% of companies with connected vehicles already used or planned to use vehicle-box data through a telematics platform within three years in 2024.
- 38% of global companies using telematics data cited locating vehicles or improving vehicle security among their two main reasons in 2024.
- 31% cited improving driver safety or behaviors among their two main reasons for using telematics data in 2024.
- 29% cited improving operational efficiency among their two main reasons for using telematics data in 2024.
- 23% cited reducing fleet costs among their two main reasons for using telematics data in 2024.
- 47% of surveyed global fleet operators actively used AI tools in their technology stack in 2024.
- Telematics feedback reduced less-severe yellow unsafe events by 55% for United States sleeper-cab drivers in a 2014 field study.
- Telematics feedback reduced more-severe red unsafe events by 60% for United States sleeper-cab drivers in a 2014 field study.
- The share of miles above 65 mph fell 42% for sleeper-cab drivers in the 2014 United States field study.
- Fuel economy improved 5.4% for sleeper-cab drivers and 9.3% for day-cab drivers in the 2014 United States field study.
- Currys reported a 10.8% MPG increase across 672 United Kingdom vehicles in its case study reported in January 2025.
- Currys reported nearly an 11% fall in CO2 emissions for its United Kingdom fleet in the same case study.
- Currys reported £416,000 in annual fuel-bill reduction in the one-year result reported in January 2025.
- A five-truck Salt Lake City pilot recorded $4,815 in fuel savings over 30 days in a source published in 2014.
- The Caltrans Smart Pedal trial found fuel-economy changes ranging from -1.72% to +6.29% across six vehicles from August through December 2022.
Contents
- Connected-fleet adoption and penetration
- Telematics data use and management priorities
- Driver safety and speeding outcomes
- Fuel economy, idling and emissions
- Costs and operational efficiency
- Field trials and implementation benchmarks
Connected-Fleet Adoption and Fleet Telematics Penetration
The 2024 Fleet and Mobility Barometer measures connected fleets among companies with corporate passenger cars and light commercial vehicles. Its definition changed in 2024, and the report warns against comparing these penetration figures with 2023.
| Population or location | Connected-fleet result | Period and scope |
|---|---|---|
| Smaller companies | 42% | 2024 global survey |
| Largest companies | 54% | 2024 global survey |
| Brazil, Mexico, Peru and United Kingdom | Above 50% | 2024 country comparison |
| New Zealand and Canada | 30% | 2024 country comparison |
| Germany | 32% | 2024 country comparison |
Source: Fleet and Mobility Barometer 2024.
The same survey found that 16% of companies with connected vehicles already used vehicle-box data through a telematics platform in 2024. Including companies planning to use it within the next three years, the share was 61%; the denominator excludes companies without connected vehicles.
In the Barometer’s country comparison, 16 countries met or exceeded the global average for using or considering telematics data within three years. This is the report’s comparison statement, not a census of all countries worldwide.
Two surrounding fleet indicators provide context but are not telematics-adoption measures: 26% of companies globally used operating leasing as their main fleet-financing method in 2024, compared with 29% in Europe, while 70% of companies with passenger cars had implemented or were considering at least one alternative-fuel technology for the next three years.
Fleet Telematics Data Use and Management Priorities
Companies use telematics data for several overlapping objectives. In the 2024 Barometer, respondents using telematics data selected two main reasons, so the percentages below are not mutually exclusive.
- 38% cited locating vehicles or improving vehicle security.
- 31% cited improving driver safety or behaviors.
- 29% cited improving operational efficiency.
- 23% cited reducing fleet costs.
- 22% cited avoiding unauthorized use.
- 13% cited reducing environmental impact.
- 6% cited optimizing car sharing.
Source: Fleet and Mobility Barometer 2024.
The 2024 TS24 survey adds a broader technology and workforce view. It found that 47% of surveyed global fleet operators actively used AI tools in their technology stack, while 27% had implemented driver-recognition and reward programs, 25% planned performance-based driver bonuses, and 24% were enhancing overall benefits to support and retain drivers.
The same survey reported that 56% of respondents did not expect local governments to mandate a transition to sustainable energy. More than half said the cost-of-living crisis negatively affected driver mental health; the source reports a threshold rather than an exact percentage.
Source: TS24 — The Telematics Survey 2024.
Fleet Telematics Driver-Safety and Speeding Outcomes
A 2014 United States field study examined sleeper-cab and day-cab drivers after a program involving monitoring plus information, feedback, training and/or incentives. The results therefore should not be attributed to telematics hardware alone, and the study is not a randomized population estimate.
| Measured outcome | Sleeper-cab drivers | Day-cab drivers | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| Less-severe yellow unsafe events | 55% reduction | — | 2014 field study |
| More-severe red unsafe events | 60% reduction | — | 2014 field study |
| Share of miles above 65 mph | 42% decrease | 33% decrease | 2014 field study |
| Share of miles above 1,500 RPM | 48% decrease | 27% increase | 2014 field study |
Source: Study of the Impact of a Telematics System on Safe and Fuel-Efficient Driving in Trucks.
The speeding measure is the share of miles above 65 mph, not the number of speeding events. Likewise, the RPM figures measure the share of miles above 1,500 RPM, and the day-cab increase occurred alongside the study’s other intervention results.
Fleet Telematics Fuel Economy, Idling and Emissions Data
The same United States truck study reported fuel-economy improvements of 5.4% for sleeper-cab drivers and 9.3% for day-cab drivers in 2014. These are intervention results from the field study rather than universal fleet benchmarks.
Currys reported a larger company-specific set of outcomes from a United Kingdom deployment. The case study covered 262 Ford Transits and 410 Iveco Dailys, or 672 vehicles in total, and reported a 10.8% MPG increase, nearly an 11% fall in CO2 emissions and a 5% reduction in vehicle idling.
Currys also reported a 98% reduction in incidents associated with riskier driving styles since adoption in 2016, with the result reported in 2025. The summary does not define the incident denominator, so the figure should be treated as a company-reported case-study result.
Source: Fleet Technology Helps Currys Reduce its Fuel Bill.
A California Caltrans Smart Pedal field test ran from August through December 2022 and covered six compatible vehicles. Fuel-economy changes ranged from -1.72% to +6.29%, while mileage collected per test vehicle ranged from 548 to about 2,800 miles; payload, passenger, driver and accessory effects were uncontrolled.
The largest Smart Pedal fuel-economy gain was estimated to save 0.13 gallons per vehicle-day under assumed operating conditions. The result is an estimate derived from the strongest vehicle result, not a general fleet average.
Fleet Telematics Costs and Operational Efficiency
Reported savings range from small controlled pilots to a large company case study, but the populations and currencies differ. They should not be combined into a single universal return-on-investment figure.
| Fleet or study | Reported cost or saving | Measurement period |
|---|---|---|
| Currys, United Kingdom | £416,000 annual fuel-bill reduction | One year, reported January 2025 |
| Currys, United Kingdom | Nearly £620 annual fuel savings per vehicle | One year equivalent, reported January 2025 |
| Five-truck Salt Lake City pilot | $4,815 fuel savings | 30 days |
| Same five-truck pilot | $963 per participating truck | 30 days, derived |
| Caltrans Smart Pedal scenario | $0.62 fuel savings per vehicle-day | August–December 2022 estimate |
Sources: Fleet Technology Helps Currys Reduce its Fuel Bill, Introduction of delivery fleet tracking system results in fuel savings of $4,815 across the five-truck fleet during a month long pilot program, and Smart Pedal Technology Field-Tested on Vehicles in California Revealed an Increase in Fuel Economy of up to 6.29 Percent.
The Salt Lake City pilot recorded the $4,815 saving and a 1,605-mile reduction across five trucks during 30 days. The $963-per-truck figure is simple division of the reported total and is not an annualized saving.
In the Caltrans economic analysis, the Smart Pedal system’s unit cost was $299. The $0.62 daily fuel-saving estimate used a $4.80-per-gallon gasoline assumption and the largest vehicle result, so it is scenario-specific.
The TS24 survey reported that 96% of respondents achieved measurable savings through administration-time, fuel or overall-cost savings. That combined measure does not isolate telematics-only savings or a common dollar amount.
Fleet Telematics Field Trials and Implementation Benchmarks
Implementation evidence shows why duration, sample size and intervention design matter. A Caltrans field test ran for four months after installation, from August through December 2022, and the Smart Pedal payback period was estimated at 15.76 months for the highest-fuel-economy vehicle.
That payback estimate used the highest-performing vehicle and an assumed fuel price. It is not a fleet-wide forecast, and the study involved only six compatible vehicles.
The Currys case study provides a larger named-fleet benchmark: 262 Ford Transits and 410 Iveco Dailys were included in the deployment. Its outcomes remain company-reported and are not independently controlled fleet-wide estimates.
A peer-reviewed Belgian eco-driving study monitored 10 drivers over 10 months before and after training. Average fuel consumption fell 5.8% four months after the eco-driving course, but the study was a small observational before-after design and warned that driver behavior may regress over time.
Source: Using on-board logging devices to study the longer-term impact of an eco-driving course.
Across these studies, the most defensible interpretation is conditional: telematics-supported programs can produce measured safety, fuel and operating improvements in named fleets, while survey penetration figures describe companies rather than all vehicles worldwide. Differences in geography, fleet composition, measurement period and intervention design are essential when comparing results.