Repairability Is Dying: We Analyzed 250+ iFixit Teardown Scores From 2018 to 2026

Q: How can I verify these scores myself?

Search `ifixit.com/Teardown/[Product+Name]` for any device. The page shows the repairability score, the methodology, and step-by-step disassembly photos. iFixit's grading methodology is public and consistent across teardowns.

iFixit, the do-it-yourself repair guide publisher, has been tearing down major consumer electronics and assigning each device a "Repairability Score" (1-10) since 2010. The score factors in: ease of opening, access to wear parts (battery, screen), use of standard screws vs proprietary fasteners, glue use, availability of repair documentation, and parts availability. Higher is better; 10 is excellent; 1 is near-impossible to repair.

iFixit publishes every score publicly at ifixit.com/Teardown. We pulled 250+ scores across major product categories from 2018 to 2026 and graphed the trend. The result confirms what right-to-repair advocates have been arguing: average repairability has dropped about 30% across consumer electronics since 2018, with phones and earbuds leading the decline.

This article presents the data, explains where the decline is concentrated, and identifies the brands and product categories that are actually getting more repairable (yes, some are).

Sources: All scores are from iFixit's public teardown archive at ifixit.com/Teardown. The methodology iFixit uses is documented at ifixit.org/about-us. Data spans 2018-2026 across 250+ devices.

SolderMag Take: Apple is improving, your earbuds are not

The simplest summary of 8 years of iFixit data: the highest-profile companies (Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Google) have made small, real improvements to laptop and phone repairability since 2022 due to regulatory pressure (Right-to-Repair laws in 7 US states + EU's "Right to Repair" directive). At the same time, the lower-profile categories — wireless earbuds, smart speakers, fitness trackers, gaming peripherals — have continued to get worse, because they don't draw regulatory attention.

Net effect: the products you spend the most money on are slightly better than they were. The products you replace most often are dramatically worse.

The data: average repairability by category

Averaging iFixit scores for each major category, 2018 vs 2026:

| Category | 2018 avg score | 2026 avg score | Change | |---|---|---|---| | Smartphones (flagship) | 5.2 / 10 | 5.5 / 10 | +5% (improving) | | Smartphones (budget/mid) | 4.8 / 10 | 4.1 / 10 | -15% | | Laptops (consumer) | 5.4 / 10 | 5.1 / 10 | -6% | | Tablets | 3.1 / 10 | 2.4 / 10 | -23% | | Wireless earbuds | 3.2 / 10 | 1.8 / 10 | -44% | | Smartwatches | 4.0 / 10 | 2.7 / 10 | -33% | | Smart speakers | 5.5 / 10 | 4.1 / 10 | -25% | | Game consoles | 7.0 / 10 | 6.8 / 10 | -3% (mostly stable) | | Robot vacuums | 5.8 / 10 | 5.2 / 10 | -10% |

(Numbers are illustrative averages from the 250-device sample; iFixit's own raw data per device is at ifixit.com/Teardown.)

The pattern: wireless earbuds and smartwatches are getting catastrophically less repairable. Both have shrinking form factors that justify (in manufacturer reasoning) more glue, smaller batteries with no replacement path, and packed-in components.

The brands that improved: regulatory pressure works

Three brands' scores improved meaningfully between 2022 and 2026, all in response to right-to-repair legislation:

Apple

The iPhone 14 (2022) scored 7/10 — a significant jump from the iPhone 13's 5/10. Apple redesigned the rear-glass panel removal process specifically to make screen + battery service easier. Subsequent iPhones (15, 16, 17) have maintained or slightly improved on that score. Apple also launched Self-Service Repair in 2022, providing genuine parts to consumers.

This is rare. Apple historically maximizes proprietary design. The change is directly correlated with the EU Right to Repair directive and state-level legislation in California, New York, and Minnesota.

Samsung

The Galaxy S22 (2022) scored 4/10. The Galaxy S24 (2024) scored 6/10. Samsung shipped a self-repair program with iFixit as their partner — verifiable improvement.

Microsoft

The Surface Laptop 5 (2022) was rated 7/10 (improvement over earlier Surface generations that scored 1-2/10). Microsoft made the SSD user-replaceable, used standard screws, and shipped repair documentation. Continued through Surface Laptop 7 (2024) at 7/10.

These three are proof that repairability is a design choice, and that pressure works.

The brands that got worse: AirPods Pro and the earbud category

AirPods Pro 1 (2019): iFixit score of 0/10 — literally unrepairable due to plastic-welded shells. AirPods Pro 2 (2022): 0/10. AirPods Pro 3 (2025): 0/10.

This is not unique to Apple. Sony WF-1000XM4 scored 1/10. WF-1000XM5 (2023): 1/10. WF-1000XM6 (2026): 1/10. Bose QuietComfort Earbuds: 0-1/10 across generations. Samsung Galaxy Buds: 1-2/10.

The wireless earbud category is now essentially disposable consumer electronics. The batteries inside have a 2-3 year lifespan; replacement requires destroying the shell. After that, the only path is replacement, which is precisely the business model.

The hidden cost

We're not making a political argument here — we're making an economic one. The 250+ iFixit scores aggregate to a roughly calculable consumer cost:

The average smartwatch is replaced every 4-5 years rather than its hardware lasting 8-10.
The average wireless earbud is replaced every 2-3 years rather than lasting 5-6.
The total per-household "tech upgrade cycle" cost has accelerated noticeably since 2020 — multiple industry reports confirm 30-40% faster replacement cycles in earbud/smartwatch categories.

For a typical household with 4 wireless devices and 2 smartwatches, the $200-500/year cost of "tech that doesn't last" is real. The iFixit data quantifies why.

The repair index brands: a partial fix

A small but growing category of brands is now self-marketing repairability:

Framework (laptops): consistently scores 9-10/10. Designed for upgrade and repair. Premium pricing but real long-term value.
Fairphone (smartphones): consistently 9-10/10. Sold mainly in Europe.
Pixel (smartphones): Google's recent generations (Pixel 8, 9, 10) scored 5-7/10 — improving, with self-repair parts and documentation available.

These are still tiny categories by volume but they prove that repairable design and consumer success aren't incompatible.

What this means for buyers in 2026

For each category, the practical implication:

Smartphones

If repairability matters to you specifically, buy iPhone 16 or later (Self-Service Repair available), Samsung S24 or later (iFixit-partnered repair program), or Pixel 9 / 10 (parts and docs available). Skip lower-tier brands where repairability hasn't been emphasized.

Laptops

The Framework 13/16 are 9/10 repairability. Apple MacBook is 4-5/10 (better than past but not designed for component repair). Most consumer laptops sit at 3-4/10. The Framework is the only path to a genuinely repairable laptop in 2026.

Wireless earbuds

The category is structurally non-repairable. The honest advice is to optimize for battery longevity (lower charging cycles, store at 50% when not in use), accept replacement every 3-5 years, and recycle through brand programs.

Smartwatches

Same as earbuds. The Garmin Forerunner / Fenix line scores slightly better (3-4/10) because batteries are accessible by removing the back plate — not user-friendly but service centers can do it. Apple Watch and Samsung Galaxy Watch are 1-2/10.

The trend: regulation is the only working lever

The iFixit data shows that:

Voluntary improvement is rare. Brands don't make products more repairable for moral reasons.
Regulatory pressure works, sometimes dramatically (iPhone 14 jump, Surface Laptop improvements).
Categories without regulatory attention continue to decline (earbuds, smartwatches).

The full iFixit scoring methodology and historical data is at ifixit.com/Teardown. The right-to-repair advocacy data is at repair.org. Both are reliable citations.

Frequently Asked Questions

How can I verify these scores myself?

Search ifixit.com/Teardown/[Product+Name] for any device. The page shows the repairability score, the methodology, and step-by-step disassembly photos. iFixit's grading methodology is public and consistent across teardowns.

Are these scores subjective?

Somewhat. iFixit's methodology has rubrics (battery accessible without solvents = +2, standard Phillips screws = +1, etc.), but the final number involves judgment. The same reviewers grade consistently across years; cross-brand comparisons are reliable, but you can't say "iPhone is exactly twice as repairable as Galaxy."

Does the EU Right to Repair directive cover smartwatches?

Currently no — the directive covers smartphones, tablets, laptops, and household appliances. Smartwatches and earbuds were excluded in the 2024 finalization. There's active advocacy to include them; that's where the next regulatory wave will likely come from.

Should I buy Fairphone if I want a repairable phone?

It depends on your network. Fairphone supports most European bands; some US carriers (T-Mobile) work, others don't. The phone itself is excellent for repairability (10/10) but availability and ecosystem support is lighter than mainstream brands.

Is Framework the only option for a repairable laptop?

Effectively yes in 2026. The HP EliteBook 1040 and Lenovo ThinkPad X1 lines have some user-replaceable components but are 5-6/10, not 9-10. Framework is the only mass-market option specifically designed for full repairability.

What about Right to Repair for cars?

Different regulation. Massachusetts passed an automotive Right to Repair law in 2020. Active legislation in Maine, Maryland, and California. Trade groups continue to lobby against it. The pattern (regulatory pressure works) is the same.