Ask most fleet managers how confident they are in their cost tracking, and they’ll tell you: very. Ask them what their average vehicle actually costs to operate per mile, all-in, and the number gets harder to find.

That gap between perceived visibility and real financial clarity is the subject of new research from Bobit Business Media, which surveyed 190 fleet professionals in early 2026. What the data reveals is less a technology failure than a connectivity failure, and it’s more widespread than most operations realize.

While nearly 90% of respondents reported moderate or high confidence in their cost tracking capabilities, many also acknowledged relying on spreadsheets, disconnected systems, and quarterly reconciliation processes to manage total cost of ownership (TCO). The result is what many in the industry increasingly describe as a “confidence gap”—fleets believe they understand their costs, but fragmented systems and delayed reporting leave major blind spots hidden beneath the surface.

THE CONFIDENCE GAP

At first glance, fleet cost management appears to be improving. Most fleets today have access to far more operational and financial data than they did even a few years ago. Fuel card platforms provide transaction-level visibility. Fleet maintenance systems track repairs and service intervals. Telematics platforms monitor vehicle activity in real time.

But according to the research, the issue is no longer collecting data. It’s connecting it.

Many fleets still manage costs across separate platforms, requiring managers to manually piece together information from fuel systems, maintenance software, telematics tools, accounting programs, and spreadsheets. When those systems don’t communicate in real time, the gap between what a manager sees and what’s actually happening can be significant. A fuel card might flag a spending spike, for example, but without maintenance or telematics data, there’s no way to tell whether the cause is a vehicle efficiency problem, an unauthorized purchase, or a driver taking inefficient routes. Each possibility has a different fix, but the siloed view makes them look the same.

That fragmentation creates more than administrative headaches. It affects decision-making.

“It’s not just that the data may be wrong,” one Coast stakeholder explained during discussions surrounding the report findings. “It’s that fleets may be highly confident in reporting that still lacks the full operational picture.”

The research also found that many fleets still review TCO quarterly or annually rather than continuously. In practice, that means managers are often looking backward at what already happened instead of spotting problems early enough to prevent them.

THE COSTS FLEETS DON'T FULLY SEE

One of the clearest findings from the research was that indirect costs remain some of the hardest expenses for fleets to measure accurately.

Most organizations can track direct costs like fuel purchases or repair invoices. But costs tied to downtime, delayed jobs, lost productivity, overtime labor, or replacement vehicles are much harder to quantify, even though they can have a major impact on profitability.

That blind spot can distort how fleets evaluate overall vehicle performance.

“A lot of fleets can tell you exactly what a repair costs, but not what it costs to have that vehicle out of service,” a Fleetio stakeholder noted.

For many work vehicle operations, the downtime itself may end up costing more than the repair. A vehicle sitting in the shop can delay service calls, disrupt routes, create scheduling problems, and reduce the productivity of entire crews.

Financial blind spots take a different form on the spend-management side. Fuel remains one of the more trackable fleet expenses, but disconnected systems leave gaps that don’t show up until a manager reconciles the month.

That can include excessive purchases made at the wrong station, off-policy spending that slips through manual review, or transactions that are miscategorized and quietly inflate operating costs over time. When fuel and expense data aren’t connected to operational systems in real time, managers aren’t just missing information. They’re reconciling costs they could have caught earlier. Without integrated visibility between financial and operational systems, those costs continue to accumulate between review cycles.

DATA EXISTS, BUT IT STILL DOESN'T CONNECT

The research identified data integration as one of the biggest barriers to achieving mature TCO visibility for fleets.

That challenge becomes more complicated as fleets adopt additional software tools. A typical operation may use separate systems for fuel management, fleet maintenance, telematics, accounting, procurement, and driver management.

Industry stakeholders involved in the research repeatedly emphasized that siloed systems limit the value of the data itself. When operational and financial information live in separate places, the relationships between them, the ones that explain why costs are moving, stay invisible.

For example, maintenance systems may accurately track repair history but still fail to show the broader financial impact of downtime or delayed service decisions if that information remains isolated from spend and operational data.

Increasingly, fleets are trying to solve those problems by connecting systems across operational and financial workflows. Integrated platforms that combine fuel data, maintenance activity, and vehicle performance information can give managers a clearer picture of what’s happening across the fleet in real time, and more importantly, why it’s happening.

VISIBILITY WITHOUT ACTION IS STILL A BLIND SPOT

Still, better technology alone does not automatically solve the problem.

Several participants in the research discussions emphasized that fleets must also actively use the actionable insights these systems provide. Implementing modern software does not guarantee stronger cost control if workflows, reporting habits, and operational behaviors remain unchanged.

In many fleets, delayed reporting cycles and manual processes persist even after newer tools are in place.

The data exists. The connection exists. But if the operational reflex is still to review costs quarterly, the advantage of real-time visibility goes largely unused.

The real shift happens when managers begin using connected systems to influence decisions as they unfold rather than reviewing results after costs have already escalated. That can include automatically triggering preventive maintenance schedules, immediately identifying unusual spending activity, flagging out-of-policy purchases, or connecting fuel, maintenance, and telematics data to improve vehicle-level decision-making.

“Cost is something fleets influence in the moment, not just measure later,” a Fleetio stakeholder noted during discussions surrounding the research.

That idea reflects a broader shift happening across the fleet industry. TCO management is gradually evolving from a retrospective reporting exercise into a more proactive operational strategy.

LOOKING AHEAD

Fleet operations are becoming more connected, more data-driven, and more dependent on real-time decision-making. But the transition remains uneven, and for many organizations, the confidence gap identified in this research is closing more slowly than the technology would suggest.

Most fleet managers are doing exactly what their systems allow. The problem is that those systems, individually capable, collectively fragmented, create a version of cost visibility that feels complete until it isn’t.

Closing that gap isn’t about collecting more data. It’s about knowing which data is actually talking to which, and building the workflows to act on it before small problems become expensive ones.