18 shops · 56 ·847+ products

Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Hankook ION Evo vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Continental UltraContact NXT

Test Profile

BFGoodrich
ACTIVAN WINTER
Hankook
ION Evo
Falken
e.Ziex
Continental
UltraContact NXT
Number of tests
1
1
3
3
Best position
#13
#1
#2
#1
Average position
13.0
1.0
3.7
1.3
Latest test
2019
2025
2025
2026
Available sizes
15
66
36
23

These tyres were not tested together in the same test. The scores below are aggregated from different independent tests, so direct comparison should be taken with caution.

Wet
Hankook ION Evo
89%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Continental UltraContact NXT
86%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
56%
Hankook ION Evo
77%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Continental UltraContact NXT
77%
Wet braking
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
40%
Hankook ION Evo
97%
Falken e.Ziex
87%
Continental UltraContact NXT
97%
Wet handling
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
23%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
69%
Continental UltraContact NXT
92%
Aquaplaning - cross
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
67%
Hankook ION Evo
87%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Continental UltraContact NXT
74%
Dry
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
85%
Continental UltraContact NXT
93%
Dry braking
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
82%
Hankook ION Evo
91%
Falken e.Ziex
88%
Continental UltraContact NXT
86%
Comfort
Hankook ION Evo
72%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Continental UltraContact NXT
91%
Exterior noise
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
71%
Hankook ION Evo
66%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Continental UltraContact NXT
91%
Costs
Hankook ION Evo
71%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Continental UltraContact NXT
84%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison

TheTyreLab.com

Free — on the App Store

GET

TheTyreLab.com

Free — on the App Store

Compare tyres, read test results and find the best prices — all in one app.

View in App Store