Nikola Corporation vs AB Volvo: Strategic Comparison

This in-depth comparison examines Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo across revenue, market value, business model, competitive positioning, and long-term growth strategy. Whether you are researching Nikola Corporation on its own, evaluating AB Volvo, or weighing the two companies side by side, the breakdown below highlights where each company leads and where the gap between Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo is widest.

On the headline numbers, annual revenue is $35.8M (FY2023) for Nikola Corporation and ~$47.9B (FY2025) for AB Volvo, while their respective market capitalizations stand at N/A and N/A. Nikola Corporation is headquartered in United States and AB Volvo in Sweden, and those different home markets shape how each company competes.

Nikola Corporation: Nikola Corporation was one of the best-known casualties of the 2020 EV SPAC boom. It promised to decarbonize long-haul trucking with hydrogen semis and fueling stations, and it did put Tre battery-electric and fuel cell trucks into customer fleets from 2022 onward. But it lost far more money than it earned and was weighed down by its founder's fraud. It entered bankruptcy in February 2025 and is being liquidated. The company is headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona. The zero-emissions commercial truck startup was founded in 2014 in Salt Lake City, Utah, by Trevor Milton, experiencing a meteoric 2020 SPAC valuation boom before surviving founder fraud, criminal conviction, and restructuring into a hydrogen fuel-cell truck manufacturer.

AB Volvo: Volvo Group is a public Swedish industrial company that reported ~$47.9 billion (SEK 479.2 billion) in FY2025 net sales and operates across commercial transport, construction equipment, power solutions, financing and services. The company is headquartered in Gothenburg, Sweden.

Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo pursue distinct approaches to generating revenue, and understanding how each company operates is the foundation of any fair comparison between Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo.

Nikola Corporation business model: Nikola sold and leased Class 8 trucks, mainly the Tre BEV and Tre FCEV, through heavy-duty dealers, and through its HYLA brand it sold hydrogen fuel at its own stations and mobile fuelers. In 2023 truck sales brought in $30.1 million and service and other revenue $5.8 million. Each truck cost far more to build than it sold for (2023 gross loss: $214.1 million), so the company ran on repeated stock sales and convertible debt until the cash ran out in early 2025. Nikola no longer operates or earns revenue. The liquidating estate's job is to turn the remaining assets into cash for creditors.

AB Volvo business model: Volvo Group sells trucks, buses, construction equipment, engines and power systems, then earns further revenue from parts, maintenance, financing and connected services over the life of each vehicle or machine. Its brands include Volvo Trucks, Mack Trucks, Renault Trucks, Volvo Construction Equipment, Volvo Buses and Volvo Penta, with Volvo Financial Services funding customer purchases. Demand is cyclical because fleet and construction spending follows freight volumes, infrastructure activity, interest rates and replacement cycles.

The durability of a company's moat often decides long-term winners. Here is how the competitive advantages of Nikola Corporation stack up against those of AB Volvo.

Nikola Corporation competitive advantage: During its operating life, Nikola's main edge was its head start in hydrogen. It was one of the first companies to build Class 8 fuel cell trucks in series in North America, starting in 2023, and it paired them with its own HYLA fueling. That lead did not last: low volumes, negative gross margins and limited hydrogen supply meant it never became a lasting moat.

AB Volvo competitive advantage: Volvo Group's position rests on established truck brands, a global dealer and service network, in-house powertrain engineering, and a large installed base that feeds parts, service and financing revenue. Commercial buyers judge vehicles on uptime and running cost, which favours suppliers with dense service coverage.

Future prospects matter as much as current results. The growth strategies below explain how Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo each plan to expand from here.

Nikola Corporation growth strategy: Under CEO Steve Girsky (2023-2025), Nikola dropped side projects, put hydrogen fuel cell trucks first, built modular HYLA fueling in California and leaned on state incentives such as California's HVIP voucher program to win fleet orders. It also looked for a strategic partner or buyer. When none committed enough capital, the company turned to a court-supervised sale and liquidation in 2025.

AB Volvo growth strategy: Volvo Group is pursuing growth through its truck brands, aftermarket and uptime services, construction equipment, financial services, power solutions, and zero-emission vehicles using battery-electric, fuel-cell and renewable-fuel combustion powertrains.

A closer look at the financial trajectory of Nikola Corporation and AB Volvo rounds out the comparison.

Nikola Corporation: Nikola never came close to profitability. Revenue peaked at $49.7 million in 2022 (continuing operations, as restated) and fell to $35.8 million in 2023, when it shipped 114 trucks and posted a $966.3 million net loss. In Q3 2024 revenue was $25.2 million and the net loss from continuing operations was $199.8 million. The company relied on equity raises, a 1-for-30 reverse stock split in June 2024 and other capital measures, but it could not find enough funding and filed for Chapter 11 in February 2025. Its stock was delisted from Nasdaq, and the confirmed liquidation plan left no value for common shareholders. Nikola Corporation operates as a highly distressed American manufacturer of heavy-duty commercial battery-electric and fuel-cell electric vehicles, suffering a massively reduced valuation following severe founder scandals.

AB Volvo: Volvo Group's FY2025 net sales fell 9% to ~$47.9 billion (SEK 479.2 billion) from ~$52.7 billion (SEK 526.8 billion) in 2024 as truck and construction-equipment demand cooled and the SDLG divestment reduced reported sales. Adjusted operating income was ~$5.12 billion (SEK 51.2 billion) (10.7% margin) against ~$6.57 billion (SEK 65.7 billion) (12.5%) a year earlier, and earnings per share were SEK 16.94. The board proposed an ordinary dividend of SEK 8.50 plus an extra SEK 4.50 per share. In Q2 2026 net sales rose 3% to ~$12.6 billion (SEK 126.3 billion) (7% organic growth) and adjusted operating income climbed to ~$1.48 billion (SEK 14.8 billion), an 11.7% margin.