From the wording, they are comparing against all electric vehicles, no specific model year, called to a routine inspection (~MOT).

There is a small note explaining that the Model 3 was introduced in Denmark in 2019 (MY 2020), and therefore 2024 is the first time the M3 has been called to the routine inspection (periodiske bilsyn), hence the specific focus on that model year for this article.

I couldn't be sure from my awkward autotranslation into English. But I would have thought that if the 9% includes cars from other years that makes it worse, not better for Tesla: The article is making the point that this is the first time Tesla has been included in the figures, so it would only be newer Teslas being compared to older, other electric cars.

Quite possible. However it's also unclear if this includes hybrids. I'm certainly not a Tesla apologist, but I think journalistic misuse of or ambiguity around statistics should always be called out.

A hybrid is an electric car with extra parts so I'm not sure why including them would be unfair to Tesla either?

(Weight is a factor but lots of electric cars are similar weight to lots of hybrid cars so it's something to keep in mind no matter what and not a particular reason to exclude hybrids.)

The only point I'm trying to make is you need to compare apples to apples, and if you don't that contributes to misinformation. People run with figures from articles and press releases as if they are gold standard info, but often they are not. It's irrelevant to my point whether that is more or less fair to Tesla.

It's not misinformation if a criticism understates things a bit. The direction matters.

If misuse of statistics gets a pass due to the direction of travel that doesn't help anyone decipher future misuse of information.

I would not usually call it misuse when someone uses an overly generic statistic that somewhat weakens their point. It's closer to giving benefit of the doubt.

Hybrids are also a lot more complex so i would think much less reliable. Even Volvo Polestar hybrids are pretty cursed on second hand market.

While you're right in principle, having Toyota's massive fleet of hybrids included in the dataset could indeed mask trouble with other electric cars - because Toyotas are extremely popular here, and they are pretty much bomb proof.

Which is not surprising, since Toyota now has almost three decades worth of experience with the Hybrid Synergy Drive system, and double that experience in building reliable cars in general.

It also doesn't mention if the cars have comparable horsepower. Question is how relevant all that is if the reported issues are related to brakes, lights, wheels and steering...

Hybrids (including plug-in hybrids) aren't usually grouped under electric cars in Danish media.

I would hope that with the significantly decreased complexity of electric cars, comparing a tesla against hybrids would be rather favorable, no? It should be an easier win for the electric car than for the hybrid car.

All other cars would be model year 2020 or older (since inspection becomes mandatory at the four year mark). So best case, this is compared to cars of the same age, and if not, even older cars, which does not make the Model 3 look any better.

It would be 2020 and older; only cars which are subject to this check.