Those rankings are pretty fishy. Acura is just a rebadged Honda and they rate completely different. Also Kia and Hyundai rate higher than Mercedes, Porsche and Volkswagen, which is completely against my experience with those brands.
FWIW it has Tesla scoring near the bottom of the pack with 37 points out of a possible 100, with the lowest entrant scoring 26 points.
Volvo is surprisingly low on that ranking, I know they are now owned by Geely but their brand still has 'super reliable' as an image here in Europe which again contradicts the ratings.
I'm not sure what the inputs were and what definition of reliability they have but I'm definitely interested in finding out more.
The FAQ is here:
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisf...
And I suspect that one reason more expensive vehicles drop like a stone on the report is because they are more complex and so there is simply more that can break, on top of that a person that pays $100K for their car is more likely to be dissatisfied when something isn't working perfectly.
You'll never hear a Kia owner complain about some detailing, but if you paid $85K for a Tesla then you would expect a certain level of quality and you'd be more likely to go back to the dealer for that reason alone if what was delivered wasn't perfect. So this report is as much about expectations and brands as it is about actual reliability.
My own - super simple - method of determining vehicle reliability is to look at second hand car website and to sort by descending mileage in yearly cohorts. That very quickly shows which cars are solid and which aren't. Yes, it is 'survivorship bias', but you can discount for that by weighing by the original number of vehicles sold of a particular model.