P11: Aston Martin

Aston Martin leaves testing looking the least prepared, with much of the disruption centred around the Honda power unit. Repeated engine-related interruptions limited consistent long-run running and prevented a proper evaluation of race pace. There may still be untapped performance, but from a power unit programme perspective, Aston Martin appeared the least settled team of the pre-season

P10: Cadillac

F1’s newest entrant has taken a pragmatic approach. Cadillac lacks peak downforce and struggles in high-speed direction changes, but the platform is mechanically predictable and relatively kind on tyres. That’s a solid starting point. Points will require chaos ahead, but this is not an embarrassing debut.

P9: Williams

Williams appears to be paying the price for an ambitious concept. The car looks slightly overweight and front-end limited on corner entry. While single-lap pace occasionally flattered it on softer compounds, the race simulations exposed inconsistency. There’s development headroom, but work to do.

P8: Audi

Audi showed one of the clearest upward trends across the three weeks. Early instability under braking and rough deployment transitions were gradually refined. The power unit’s absolute output remains hard to judge with a single team running it, but integration and drivability improved markedly by the final days.

P7: Racing Bulls

Racing Bulls runs an aggressive rear-end philosophy that rewards commitment but punishes over-driving. It looks sharp in fast sections but still slightly nervous in heavy braking zones. The ingredients for upper-midfield pace are present, however consistency will decide how often it materialises.

P6: Haas

Haas F1 Team may not grab headlines, but it quietly delivered one of the most complete test programmes. Strong correlation between simulator and track data, solid reliability and balanced tyre usage give it a dependable baseline. It lacks a standout advantage, yet avoids obvious weaknesses, which could prove a valuable trait in 2026.

P5: Alpine

Alpine F1 Team appears more cohesive than in previous cycles. Efficient cooling and compact packaging have produced competitive long-run consistency. Traction out of slower corners still needs refinement, but the overall aerodynamic platform looks stable and adaptable across conditions.

P4: Red Bull

Red Bull Racing no longer projects untouchable dominance, but it remains firmly in contention. The car excels through medium-speed corners and shows strong deployment characteristics. Whether it has additional performance in reserve or is already near its ceiling is the big unknown heading into Melbourne.

P3: McLaren

McLaren looks like one of the most balanced packages outside the traditional works giants. Tyre management across longer stints was particularly impressive. There may be a small deficit in outright top speed, but overall composure and adaptability place it firmly in the lead fight.

P2: Ferrari

Scuderia Ferrari combined eye-catching technical innovation with genuine pace. Strong acceleration phases and responsive front-end behaviour stood out. However, in sustained race simulations it didn’t quite match the consistency of the team ranked first. The ceiling is high, but execution will be critical.

P1: Mercedes

Mercedes looked the most complete package overall. Not necessarily the flashiest on headline times, but the most controlled across varying fuel loads and compound changes. Energy harvesting strategy appears well integrated, and the car remains composed under braking and traction. If testing form translates, Mercedes starts 2026 as the reference point.