Trunk comparison: Mazda Mazda CX-60 vs VW ID.4
Most Important Difference (>10%)
The clearly biggest difference is the depth of the trunk (distance from loading edge → trunk floor): The VW ID.4 offers +3.9 in here (indicated as +900% in the data).
Specifically: The trunk floor of the ID.4 lies significantly lower below the loading edge than in the Mazda CX‑60. This greater depth increases the available cargo volume and allows bulky or tall items to be recessed further "into the vehicle." At the same time, the deeper loading surface also means that when lifting out heavy items, more lifting effort is required because they have to be lifted higher over the loading edge when removing them.
Other Differences (under 10%)
The remaining distances are significantly smaller and affect everyday usability less strongly: The Mazda has about +1.6 in longer cargo space with folded seats and with the first row upright (2–4%), +1.2 in (3%) in the narrowest interior width, and +0.8 in (2%) in the width of the opening.
The height of the trunk opening is +1.6 in (5%) larger in the ID.4. The loading edge height of both models is the same.
Implications for Usability
Practical effect of the large depth in the ID.4: more volume and the possibility to place bulky or voluminous items deeper (good for stacked luggage, camper equipment, shopping). Disadvantage: heavy cargo must be lifted higher when removing, making loading and unloading potentially more tiring or less convenient.
Practical effect of the smaller differences: The slightly greater interior length and width of the Mazda (a few centimeters) marginally improve loading of long or wide items but do not make it significantly more practical than the ID.4. The higher opening of the ID.4 slightly eases inserting tall items, but the difference is small.
Summary
For maximum usable depth and volume, the VW ID.4 is better — it offers significantly more trunk depth but requires more effort when handling heavy loads. Those who want somewhat more usable length/width but prefer a flatter loading floor profile (easier loading and unloading) are better off with the Mazda CX‑60.