If you’ve ever dropped your iPhone and watched the repair bill climb past $300, you already know something is wrong. Now there’s data to back up that feeling. According to a new report from consumer advocacy group US PIRG, the iPhone is officially the least repairable phone on the market, earning a D- rating. Samsung isn’t far behind with a D. Even Google, which at least scored a C-, looks good by comparison.
The rankings come from US PIRG’s annual “Failing the Fix” report, which collates repairability scores from European laws with US-specific factors. Europe has been ahead on this issue. France required repairability scores on product packaging back in 2021, and the EU doubled down with its own Product Registry for Energy Labelling in 2023. Both laws grade devices on disassembly ease, spare parts availability, documentation, and battery longevity.
What’s striking isn’t just that Apple landed at the bottom. It’s that the company has made minimal progress despite years of right-to-repair activism and several corporate concessions.
The Better Competitors Exist, But They’re Not Household Names
Motorola phones got a B+. Yes, Motorola. The company most people associate with the early 2000s is now the repairability leader in smartphones. Google’s Pixels landed in the middle at C-. Neither company is racing to innovate in ways that actually serve consumers, but at least their phones can be taken apart without requiring a small loan.
For laptops, the story is slightly different but equally depressing. Asus earned a B+ while Apple’s MacBooks scraped by with a C-. At least there’s some variety in the laptop market. With phones, the pecking order is clear: Apple and Samsung want your old device to feel broken so you’ll buy a new one.
That’s not speculation. It’s economics.
Why Repairability Scores Keep Getting Worse
Here’s the counterintuitive part. Apple’s iPhone rating actually improved from an F in 2022 to a C- in 2025. That sounds like progress until you realize the reason: European data revealed how bad everything actually is. When US PIRG had less concrete information, companies could hide behind opacity. Now that repair scores are mandatory in Europe, the rankings reflect reality.
Nathan Proctor, senior director of US PIRG’s right-to-repair campaign, put it plainly: “When we’ve been grading on a curve, Apple has not been a standout in the bad column. But why are we grading on a curve? We should just have longer-lasting products.”
The software lock-in is a major culprit. Even if you could physically replace an iPhone screen or battery, Apple’s software makes older devices feel sluggish or incompatible with new apps. It’s planned obsolescence with a silicon valley sheen.
The Real Cost Isn’t Just Your Repair Bill
This isn’t just about your wallet, though the financial argument is strong. US PIRG is making a sustainability point that’s harder to ignore. Trashing internet-connected devices every few years because they’ve been deliberately engineered to feel unusable is, frankly, insane. The environmental footprint of smartphone manufacturing dwarfs almost everything else most of us do in a year.
Proctor articulated the stakes plainly: “This is an emerging, vitally important issue that we need better leadership on from companies and from other public policy officials. We should not be trashing all of our internet-connected stuff every couple of years because it’s impossible to use it with the software. It’s totally unsustainable.”
The optimistic note comes from an unexpected place. Proctor says Apple engineers are capable of solving repairability problems if incentives shift. The company clearly has the resources. What’s missing is the will.
Can Rankings Actually Change Anything?
That’s the question. US PIRG published these scores hoping shame and transparency would push manufacturers toward better practices. Some concessions have already happened. Apple and Samsung have made repair tools and documentation more available. Trade-in programs exist. But the rankings suggest these moves are cosmetic.
For real change, you’d need policy teeth. The EU is building that framework. The US hasn’t, which is why Apple and Samsung can keep treating repairability as a public relations problem rather than a design imperative. Until regulatory pressure reaches American shores, don’t expect your next phone to be built for the repair shop rather than the landfill.
The uncomfortable truth is that companies will optimize for what they’re measured on. Right now, they’re measured on quarterly profits, not longevity or environmental impact. Until that calculus flips, your expensive new iPhone will still feel ancient in two years by design.
