The consensus is still forming. However, Reagan is neither the icon he is portrayed as on the right or the demon of the left. The historical consensus on Reagan's presidency is still developing and is an exceptionally contentious topic, though I think it will ultimately settle on the notion that Reagan was a strong president overall (particularly with regards to the Cold War) who had significant flaws/blind spots (the developing world and economically underdeveloped communities in the U.S.)

The initial historiography painted Reagan as a disinterested, uninvolved leader; the "amiable dunce" that Clark Clifford described him as in 1981. Biographers Lou Cannon and Edmund Morris both subscribe to this to varying degrees and point to the scathing memoirs of advisers like David Stockman and Donald Regan as evidence. Stockman is particularly brutal, arguing that Reagan had no understanding of economics and would frequently launch into tangents that had little to do with the substance of meetings but everything to do with Reagan's talking points. Critics also point to Reagan's lack of attention in the Iran-Contra crisis and the general failure of his domestic policy to improve the plight of African-Americans and blue collar workers as further evidence of his failures as president. This school also tends to argue that Reagan had little to do with the end of the Cold War, ascribing greater agency to Gorbachev in ending it.

Recent years have seen a movement to rehabilitate Reagan, and portray a much more dynamic leader; particularly in the field of Soviet-U.S. relations. They show Reagan as deeply involved in the development of his foreign policy and as someone willing to go against his party, as seen in H.W. Brands newest biography of him. The memoirs of Caspar Weinberger (SecDef) and George Schultz (SecState) both support this, as do most of the documents from his administration. The new school ascribes significant agency to Reagan in ending the Cold War, highlighting his deft handling of the Soviet Union (in particular his ability to demand change, but not crow about it when it occurred, which provided Gorbachev some protection from domestic critics).

My research largely conforms to the latter school. Internal administration documents show Reagan as the driving force behind US-Soviet policy and demonstrate that he often proceeded with his initiatives (like SDI, nuclear abolition, and others) over the violent objections of his staffers. A major reason why the initial historiography is so negative is that Reagan's political opponents painted him as anti-intellectual and as a dunce. This began in his first campaign for governor when his opponent argued that he was just an actor, and the firing of Clark Kerr as the leader of the California university system (though in reality the Board of Regents who Reagan did not appoint bear the blame for this). These allegations continued throughout his political career, as Reagan tended to play up his common man image, despite the fact that he was a lifelong voracious reader who consumed the most important academic and popular works of his time. Another part of the issue is that Reagan's objectives of "crusade for freedom" and "peace through strength" seem at odds with each other. The first implies frequent conflict and the second peace, albeit with an aggressive posture. Reagan didn't see it this way, believing that the Soviets would only respect a strong U.S. military and that the "crusade for freedom" did not necessarily mean war with the USSR, but rather a dogged adherence to U.S. values from a position of strength.

Ultimately, Reagan is an exceptionally complex political figure as he tended to compartmentalize his life and avoid conflict. This, along with his universally acknowledged charisma, led many people to believe they knew the "true" Reagan, as he often left people feeling good about themselves and believing they had convinced of their position.

TLDR: There is no historical consensus yet. However, Reagan is certainly not "the worst president in our history," and once the historiography balances out will likely reside within the top 30% of U.S. president, largely due to his role in peacefully ending the Cold War.

Edit: Changed my percentage from 10% to 30% since I realize that Reagan isn't going to be top 5. I'm a historian not a mathematician.