Tesla still leads US fast-charger growth – but it’s raised its prices

During the third quarter of 2026, operators expanded the US public fast-charging network while making many new locations bigger. They added 4,106 ports at 664 stations from July through September. The national total reached 80,964 ports across 14,614 locations. This gives drivers more potential places to recharge, especially at newer sites with several stalls.

The expansion also changed in quality, not just quantity. New non-Tesla locations averaged five ports, up from 4.1 a year earlier. Ports rated at least 250 kilowatts made up 73% of new additions, compared with 60% the previous year. Outside Tesla, 400-kilowatt ports rose to 35% of additions from 10%.

Growth was not as fast as before. Operators added about 9% fewer ports and opened about 20% fewer stations than during the same period last year. Even so, charging use rose 26% year over year, reaching 50.4 million sessions in Q3.

The US public fast-charging network grew substantially during the third quarter of 2026. Operators installed 4,106 new fast-charging ports and opened 664 stations between July and September. A port is an individual place where an EV can connect for a fast charge, while a station can contain one or many ports.

After those additions, the country had 80,964 fast-charging ports across 14,614 locations. The distinction matters because a large station may offer many ports at one address. New non-Tesla sites averaged five ports, compared with 4.1 a year earlier. Tesla’s new stations were larger still, averaging 13.1 ports.

The rollout nevertheless slowed compared with earlier periods. Q2 brought 4,618 new ports, while additions through September were about 9% lower than during the same period last year. The network is expanding, but its growth rate is uneven.

Tesla remained the fastest-growing network during the third quarter. It added 1,287 ports through its regular Supercharger network and another 124 through Supercharger for Business. IONNA ranked second with 378 ports, while Walmart added 344. Tesla’s quarterly additions therefore exceeded either competitor by a wide margin.

Tesla’s expansion also stood out in station size. Its new locations averaged 13.1 ports. Eleven sites had at least 24 stalls, including a 48-stall location in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. IONNA’s increase came partly from converting former Circle K charging locations, including 44 stations during the quarter.

The report’s counting method also matters. Paren counts replacement chargers as new infrastructure when a new operator takes over and replaces equipment. Based on the reported additions and large station openings, Tesla still led the quarter’s growth, while IONNA accelerated sharply from Q2.

Fast-charging prices moved in different directions by network. The national average reached 54 cents per kilowatt-hour in Q3, up 2.7% from a year earlier. Paren attributes that increase to Tesla because its prices rose while the average across non-Tesla networks barely changed.

Tesla’s average non-member Supercharger price increased 15% year over year, reaching 56.9 cents per kilowatt-hour. Its member price rose 9%, reaching 39.6 cents. By comparison, the average price across non-Tesla networks remained close to 53.3 cents per kilowatt-hour for the fifth consecutive quarter.

The timing of charging can also change the bill. At stations using time-of-use pricing, peak rates averaged 63.7 cents per kilowatt-hour. Off-peak rates averaged 43.8 cents. Thus, Tesla’s price increases affected the national average, while network pricing and charging time continued to create different costs for drivers.

Charging-port utilization shows how much of a port’s monitored time is spent charging a vehicle. Paren includes unsuccessful attempts in the measure, so it is not simply the percentage of time a charger successfully delivers power. A higher figure generally indicates heavier use of the available charging equipment.

National utilization reached 15.9% in Q3, barely above 15.8% in Q2. Demand was much stronger in the 30 largest charging markets, where ports averaged 21.1% utilization. Los Angeles led those metropolitan areas at 31.8%, roughly twice the national average.

These figures show that national demand can hide major local differences. Drivers in large charging markets may encounter busier equipment even while the countrywide average appears moderate. Fast-charging sessions totaled 50.4 million in Q3, up 26% year over year, while July alone set a record with 17.6 million sessions.

Most new fast-charging stations opened in urban markets during the third quarter. Urban areas received 90% of the 664 new stations, while rural markets received just 68 additions. The article reports this concentration but does not give a specific reason for it. Therefore, the data show where chargers went, not why operators chose those locations.

The difference matters because station size and geographic coverage solve different problems. Larger urban sites can provide more stalls in places with heavy demand. But a rural driver may still face long stretches with fewer charging options, even as the national network grows. The article notes that larger charging stops are welcome but that areas beyond urban markets still need more places to stop.

This creates an uneven expansion pattern. The US reached 80,964 ports, and reliability remained strong at a national score of 93.9. Yet national totals do not guarantee convenient access everywhere, particularly for drivers traveling through rural areas.

A kilowatt-hour, or kWh, measures an amount of electrical energy. It is the unit used in the article’s charging prices, such as 54 cents per kWh. The more energy an EV receives, the more kWh appear on the charging bill. Price per kWh multiplied by energy delivered gives the charging cost, before any other fees.

A kilowatt, or kW, measures power: the rate at which energy can be delivered. A 250 kW charger is rated to deliver energy faster than a 150 kW charger, although the vehicle and charging conditions also affect the actual rate. For example, the article reports that 73% of new ports were rated at least 250 kW.

In simple terms, kWh describes how much electricity the vehicle gets, while kW describes how quickly it can get it. The article’s 400 kW figures therefore concern charging capability and speed, while its cents-per-kWh figures concern energy pricing.