Cabo Rico 38 CuttervsHunter Passage 42
Cabo Rico against Hunter · used asking prices, listed in the US
At the same age, the Hunter Passage 42 asks 12% less than the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter; on the headline Gauge Values it asks 6.1% less, which mixes ages: its boats are younger (median build year 1993 against 1989). We can't yet say which holds its value better: the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter has no published depreciation curve.
same age · 4 shared build years · 8 and 10 boats in them · Indicative · in today’s prices · asking, not sold
Head to head
The better figure on each line is in orange. Where either side has too few boats, we say so rather than pick a winner.
Year by year
Each build year's Gauge Estimate, for the 4 years both have boats in. Pooled across those years (8 and 10 boats), the Hunter Passage 42 asks 12% less than the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter.
What your budget buys
At £72,500 your money buys 4 years newer in the Hunter Passage 42: a 1995 against a 1991.
A year of ownership
Each at its Gauge Value, on a South Coast marina berth, 44 engine hours a year (the median of 103 UK-listed sailing boats that report hours). An estimate in pounds from published rates, not a quote.
Each line is the middle of the cited range, to the nearest fifty pounds. Depreciation is a year of age on each model's published curve, at its Gauge Value, and stays out of the totals.
The Cabo Rico 38 Cutter has no published depreciation curve, so its depreciation is withheld.
The totals differ by less than the two berth bands do, so neither is marked cheaper to keep.
Sources: Lake Yard price list 2026 · BerthFinder · Boatsetter · Velos Insurance; Admiral Yacht Insurance · Boating Magazine, "Calculating Boat Fuel Consumption" · Littlehampton Marina fuel prices
Specification
Questions
Which is cheaper, the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter or the Hunter Passage 42?
At the same age the Hunter Passage 42 is cheaper: the Hunter Passage 42 asks 12% less than the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter across 4 shared build years. Their Gauge Values, the median asking prices of all the boats we observed whatever their age, are £73,500 and £69,000.
Which holds its value better?
We can't say yet. The Hunter Passage 42 loses about 2.7% of its asking price a year of age, but the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter has no published depreciation curve: we fit one from at least 20 boats across six build years and publish it only when the fit holds. We have 17 Cabo Rico 38 Cutter boats across 10 build years.
Which spends less time on the market?
Boats of the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter had been listed a median of 36 days when we last saw them, against 36 days for the Hunter Passage 42. That is time listed so far, not time to sell, which we don't measure yet. 44% of the Cabo Rico 38 Cutter boats we saw 14 or more days apart cut their asking price, against 0% of the Hunter Passage 42 boats.
How do you compare them like for like?
We compare boats of the same build year. For each of the 4 years both models have boats in, we take the ratio of their median asking prices in today's prices, then pool the years, giving more weight to years with more boats on both sides. The figure is Indicative because the thinner side has 8 boats in those years. The Gauge Values compare the whole fleets instead, so they mix boats of different ages.