An investigation by Consumer Reports has found that Uber and Lyft frequently charge significantly different fares for the same routes booked at roughly the same time, with variations that extend beyond conventional dynamic pricing. The study, conducted in March and April across 17 states, involved volunteers inputting identical pickup and drop-off locations on both apps without actually ordering rides. Results showed that fares for the same route varied by a median of 50%, with some instances showing differences as high as 163%.

Testing included a variety of routes, such as an UberX ride between two towns near Florida’s Gulf Coast, where one volunteer was quoted $94.96 while another received a $65.95 price within the same minute. In New York City, a 30-minute trip from Chinatown to Queens displayed fare discrepancies ranging from under $40 to nearly $49 among different volunteers requesting rides simultaneously. Similarly, a Lyft ride across Kansas City showed fares spanning from $31 to $65 on the same day and time. The investigation also noted that nearly 11% of discounts offered on Uber appeared to be based on inflated original prices, casting doubt on the legitimacy of some promotions.

Consumer Reports emphasized concerns about what they described as “black-box” AI-driven pricing tactics, suggesting these algorithms result in unpredictable and sometimes inflated fares for the same rides. Len Sherman, an executive-in-residence at Columbia Business School and an author of research on ride-hailing economics, called the magnitude of price differentials “astonishing.”

Both Uber and Lyft disputed the findings. Uber argued that the study failed to account for essential variables such as driver distance to pickup locations, traffic conditions, and real-time marketplace dynamics, which all influence fares. An Uber spokesperson said that in a live marketplace, trips are defined not only by start and end points but also the precise moment of the request and existing conditions, which can cause prices to fluctuate “nearly every second.” The company also denied engaging in surveillance pricing or individual fare personalization.

Lyft contended that the volume of volunteers placing simultaneous ride requests could have artificially inflated prices during the investigation, thereby affecting the reported discrepancies. Both companies rejected the accusation of offering fake discounts, stating that promotions are genuine and based on transparent pricing.

The investigation follows increased scrutiny of dynamic pricing practices across multiple industries, including a recent backlash against Instacart’s surge pricing model, which the company ultimately reversed. Consumer Reports noted that while dynamic pricing is designed to reflect supply and demand, the extent and opacity of price variation in ride-hailing apps warrant further examination, with calls for greater transparency in algorithmic pricing methods.