| May 5, 2026

Starlink Hits New Highs in the U.S. 

Hughesnet and Viasat continue to lose ground to Starlink in network performance as its median download and upload speeds climb and its latency declines. 

Key takeaways:

  • According to Ookla Speedtest® data from the second half of 2025, Speedtest users on Starlink in every state but Alaska were able to get median download speeds of 100 Mbps or higher, moving it from a last-ditch option to a viable competitor for broadband service in many areas. This is more than double the number of states in 2H 2024 when users in just 23 states were able to get median download speeds of 100 Mbps or higher.
  • Starlink users in 22 states were able to get median upload speeds of 20 Mbps or higher, an improvement over the 2H of 2024 when users in no states were able to get 20 Mbps in upload speeds. This is a significant milestone because the FCC designates 20 Mbps upload speeds as the minimum threshold for broadband connectivity. 
  • 44.7% of Speedtest users on Starlink in Q4 2025 were able to meet the FCC’s minimum standard of broadband speeds of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload. This is an increase over the 17.4% of Starlink users who were able to get the FCC’s minimum standard for broadband in Q1 2025.
  • Starlink improved its median multi-server latency in all but three states —Hawaii, New Mexico and Oregon. In the 2H of 2025 10 states had a median multi-server latency of less than 40 milliseconds (ms). This is a shift from the 2H 2024 when just one state—New Jersey—had a median multi-server latency less than 40 ms. 
  • GEO satellite providers Hughesnet and Viasat are increasingly losing ground to Starlink in speeds and latency. Starlink’s median download speeds are now more than 60% higher than Hughesnet’s and more than 65% higher than Viasat’s. Median upload speeds show an even greater disparity with Starlink’s upload speeds more than 80% higher than Hughesnet’s  upload speeds and 95% higher than Viasat’s. 

Starlink’s speeds are rising and latency is declining

No longer confined to rural America, SpaceX’s low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite provider Starlink is quickly emerging as a key player in the broader telecommunications landscape. This move is exemplified by T-Mobile’s recent partnership with Starlink and the creation of SuperBroadband, a new service that combines T-Mobile’s 5G fixed wireless access (FWA) network with Starlink Broadband satellite connectivity for businesses. This white-glove service from T-Mobile, while targeted at business customers, would not be possible if Starlink’s download and upload speeds weren’t on the upswing. 

Indeed, Ookla Speedtest® data from the second half of 2025 indicates that Starlink dramatically  improved its download speed performance across all 50 states compared to the second half of 2024. In fact, Speedtest users on Starlink are now able to get median download speeds exceeding 100 Mbps in every state but Alaska. This is more than double the 23 states that recorded median download speeds exceeding 100 Mbps in the second half of 2024. 

In addition Starlink also improved its download performance in the 25th percentile, or the bottom quarter of Speedtest users on Starlink. All but two states —Connecticut and Hawaii—saw an increase in their 25th percentile speeds.  

In the second half of 2024 eleven states—Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington— had 25th percentile speeds below 50 Mbps compared to the second half of 2025 when just two states—Alaska and Florida— had 25th percentile speeds below 50 Mbps. 

Latency also improved year-over-year. Starlink has said that its goal is to deliver satellite service with just 20 milliseconds (ms) median latency and the company is making progress toward that goal. According to Speedtest data, the number of states where latency is under 40 ms increased from one (New Jersey) to 10 between 2H 2024 and 1H 2025.

The states with the lowest median multi-server latency in the second half of 2025 were New Jersey, Colorado, Arizona, and the District of Columbia, which all had median latencies of 37 ms. 

Starlink Speedtest Performance In the 50 U.S. States
How each state performs in latency, median download, and 25th percentile download. Ookla Speedtest® | 2H 2024 – 2H 2025
Starlink's performance in latency, median download, and 25th percentile download in all 50 states in the U.S.

Starlink’s “secret sauce” 

Much of the reason behind Starlink’s performance improvements is due to SpaceX’s acceleration of its satellite launches and its new Generation 3 (V3) satellites that are more powerful than earlier versions.  

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is able to add dozens of new satellites to the constellation. In February 2026, Starlink had more than 10,000 satellites in orbit. The more satellites a constellation has, the more capacity it has to handle subscribers and the faster speeds it can deliver to more places. 

In addition, Starlink’s V3 satellites provide roughly 10 times the downlink capacity. The company also has improved its inter-satellite links that allow data to bypass ground stations for longer stretches, which reduces traffic bottlenecks and lowers the latency. 

However, during this time of dramatic performance improvements, the company also has added a significant number of subscribers. At the end of 2024, Starlink had a reported 4.6 million subscribers globally. This more than doubled in 2025 and by early 2026 (February) Starlink said that it had more than 10 million active subscribers globally.

Midwest surge: Nebraska, Wyoming, and Utah lead in speed

New Jersey, North Dakota, Nebraska, South Dakota and Wyoming experienced the biggest year-over-year increase in download speeds of all the states and the District of Columbia. With the exception of New Jersey, these states are primarily in the Midwest and are characterized by having low population density. These states also benefit from having relatively flat terrain making it easier to maintain a constant, unobstructed line of sight with the satellites. 

Nebraska clocks in with the highest overall median download speed of 200.80 Mbps in the second half of 2025, an increase from 129.40 Mbps in the second half of 2024.

10 States With the Largest Gains in Starlink Download Speed Gains
Ookla Speedtest® | 2H 2024 – 2H 2025

New Jersey’s performance leap

New Jersey also saw a big jump in its 25th percentile download speeds from 11.68 Mbps in the second half of 2024 to 77.64 Mbps in the second half of 2025.  This increase suggests that Starlink’s rollout of its newer high capacity satellites was particularly advantageous to New Jersey customers. This is notable because New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the U.S. and historically Starlink has been thought to be primarily useful for those in rural areas without other broadband alternatives. 

10 States Where Starlink Had the Smallest Amount of Download Speed Gains
Ookla Speedtest | 2H 2024 to 2H 2025

High-performing states see smaller gains

In contrast to the states like Nebraska and New Jersey that saw big increases in median download speeds, Hawaii, Connecticut and Rhode Island experienced the smallest amount of change year-over-year. 

For example, both Connecticut and Rhode Island already had strong median download speeds in the second half of 2024. Connecticut’s median download speed was 135.48 Mbps and Rhode Island’s was 116.21 Mbps, both of which were above average compared to the rest of the states. 

Hawaii also had a high median download speed of 120.46 Mbps in the second half of 2024. However, Hawaii is different from the other two states because its median multi-server latency remains high (109 ms in the second half of 2025 compared to 112 ms in the second half of 2025). 

Hawaii’s high latency numbers are due to its geography. In the mainland U.S. most users live within a few hundred miles of both a ground station and a major data center (like those in Seattle, Dallas, or Virginia) so the trip that the data must make is relatively short. Because of Hawaii’s location, the data has a much longer route to a ground station and data center, making the latency higher.  

10 States With the Largest Gains in Starlink Median Upload Speeds
Ookla Speedtest | 2H 2024 vs. 2H 2025

Upload speeds improve year-over-year

Upload speeds also saw a dramatic improvement year-over-year. In the second half of 2025, Starlink users in 22 states were able to get median upload speeds of 20 Mbps or higher, an improvement over the second half  of 2024 when Speedtest users in no states were able to get 20 Mbps in upload speeds. 

This is important because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) designates 20 Mbps upload speeds as the minimum threshold for U.S. broadband connectivity. 

New Jersey, Nebraska and Minnesota had the biggest gains in median upload speeds in the second half of 2025. New Jersey increased its upload speeds from 13.79 Mbps in the second half of 2024 to 23.35 Mbps in the second half of 2025, Nebraska’s median upload speeds rose from 18.35 Mbps in the second half of 2024 to 24.94 Mbps in the second half of 2025 (Nebraska ranks No. 1 in median upload speeds for all 50 states and the District of Columbia).  And Minnesota increased its median upload speeds from 16.05 Mbps to 22.35 Mbps in the second half of 2025. 

On the other end of the spectrum, Connecticut, Hawaii, and New Hampshire saw the smallest gains in median upload speeds year-over-year.  Connecticut increased its median upload speeds from just 18.14 Mbps to 20.05 Mbps in the second half of 2025. Hawaii increased its median upload speeds from 14.45 Mbps in 2H 2024 to 16.70 Mbps in 2H 2025 and New Hampshire increased its median upload speeds from 17.24 Mbps to 19.81 Mbps year-over-year. 

The growing gap between Starlink and the GEOs

When we compare the nationwide median download speeds, median upload speeds, and median multi-server latency for Starlink and the two primary geostationary providers in the U.S. —Viasat and Hughesnet, we can see the growing performance divide between Starlink and the GEO providers.

At a nationwide level, Viasat and Hughesnet Speedtest users experience median download speeds that are more than half of that of Starlink users. As of Q1 2026 Hughesnet users were experiencing median download speeds of 48.55 Mbps, Viasat users were getting median download speeds of just 41.05 Mbps compared to Starlink users that were experiencing median download speeds of 127.39 Mbps. 

A similar gap exists in median upload speeds where in Q1 2026 Starlink users were experiencing median upload speeds of 21.46 Mbps compared to Hughesnet users with median upload speeds of 4.10 Mbps and Viasat at 0.95 Mbps. 

Neither Hughesnet nor Viasat are remotely close to matching Starlink in median multi-server latency where Starlink has a latency of just 39 ms as of Q1 2026 compared to Hughesnet with a latency of 674 ms and Viasat with 750 ms. 

A comparison of HughesNet, ViaSat and Starlink's Speeds and Latency
Ookla Speedtest® | 2H 2024 – 2H 2025
Starlink's low earth orbit download speeds compared with geostationary satellite systems HughesNet and ViaSat

GEOs try to stop their losses with lower prices 

With Starlink better speeds and lower latency and its ability to attract more customers, Viasat and Hughesnet are going on the defensive to try to minimize their customer losses. Both companies are losing customers at a steady pace. Hughesnet’s global subscriber count declined from 1.22 million in 2022 to just 739,000 in Q4 2025.  Likewise Viasat’s global subscriber count dropped from 590,000 in fiscal Q4 2021 to an estimated 159,000 in Q4 2025. 

HughesNet and ViaSat Subscribers Over Time
Data from company reports and estimates 2022 through Q4 2025
A comparison of HughesNet and ViaSat's subscriber counts

According to Speedtest data, both Hughesnet and Viasat are attracting the majority of their customers in California and Texas. While these aren’t actual subscriber numbers, Speedtest sample percentages can serve as a proxy and provide some insight into where the majority of Viasat and Hughesnet’s customers are located:  

The top 5 states with the highest percentage of samples for Viasat in Q3-Q4 2025 are:

  1. California:  12% 
  2. Texas:        10%
  3. Florida:   9%
  4. Georgia:   9%
  5. New York:   7%

The top 5 states with the highest percentage of samples for Hughesnet for the Q3-Q4 2025 period are:

  1. Texas:   10%
  2. California:     7% 
  3. Michigan:     5%
  4. North Carolina:   4%
  5. Missouri:   4%

To counteract Starlink’s impact Viasat introduced a budget-friendly plan that starts at $40 per month. According to Viasat’s web site the company has a promotional plan that costs $39.99 per month for three months, jumping to $69.99 per month thereafter. The plan, which requires a 24-month contract, claims typical download speeds will be 67 Mbps and upload speeds will be 4 Mbps. Viasat also warns users that while the plan is for unlimited data, the company may throttle speeds after 35 GB of data are used. 

Viasat  is also adding capacity and speed by upgrading its satellites. It launched Viasat-3 F1 in May 2023 to deliver more coverage to North America. That satellite has been operational since 2024. In addition, it launched Viasat-3 F2 in November 2025 and that satellite is currently in the testing phase and will enter commercial service over the Americas in May 2026. The final satellite, Viasat-3 F3 was just launched on April 29. 

Similar to Viasat, Hughesnet also introduced a low-cost plan of $39.99 per month. The plan requires a 12-month contract and promises speeds of up to 25 Mbps. Hughesnet also says that the plans include 100 GB of priority data. However, when 100 GB of priority data is gone, Hughesnet may throttle speeds. 

However, despite the low-cost plans, both Viasat and Hughesnet appear to be shifting their focus away from residential offerings toward more wholesale and enterprise customers. In fact, 

PCMag recently reported that Hughesnet is preparing to refer its own satellite internet customers to Starlink after its parent company, EchoStar, agreed to sell spectrum to SpaceX.

Starlink’s growing dominance

In Q4, 44.7% of Speedtest Starlink users were able to receive the FCC’s minimum threshold for broadband of 100/20 Mbps, making the provider look a lot less like a niche connectivity provider for unserved areas and more like a legitimate broadband competitor.

By aggressively growing its LEO constellation to more than 10,000 satellites and deploying more powerful satellites, Starlink has managed to significantly increase its speeds and lower latency even as its global subscriber base grew to 10 million. While Starlink hasn’t revealed the exact number of subscribers in the U.S., we do know that the U.S. is Starlink’s largest market. 

It will be interesting to see how Starlink reacts to potential competition from other LEO players such as Amazon LEO. Amazon is required by the FCC to have 1,618 satellites in orbit by July 30, 2026.  As of early April the company had launched between 210 and 241 satellites. In addition, it has filed a request with the FCC for a two-year extension to launch the 1,618 satellites citing a shortage of available launch vehicles. 

Starlink’s inroads puts GEO providers such as Hughesnet and Viasat at a critical crossroads. Despite efforts to retain customers through budget-friendly pricing and localized hardware upgrades, the performance gap—particularly in latency—remains a huge hurdle for the GEO architecture. 

For more information about Speedtest Intelligence data and insights, subscribe to Ookla Research updates.



Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 30, 2026

The Iberian Blackout, One Year On: Operators Are Outpacing Regulators on Telecom Resilience

The Iberian blackout showed how quickly mobile networks can follow the power grid down.

On 28 April 2025, at 12:33 CEST, the largest stress test of telecom infrastructure in modern European memory unfolded in less than three hours. A cascading collapse of the Iberian power grid severed mains electricity to virtually all of mainland Spain and Portugal, forcing mobile sites onto battery and generator backups and triggering a near-synchronous collapse of mobile coverage across the peninsula. By the late evening, more than half of mobile users in large parts of Spain and over 60% in the worst-affected areas of Portugal had no service at all.

Twelve months on, the Iberian regulatory and operator response has not converged. Spain has drafted Europe’s most ambitious telecom autonomy rule but has not enacted it. Portugal’s parliament published cross-party recommendations on the anniversary week. And operators, in the meantime, have made the most concrete commitments of all.

Key Takeaways:

  • Spain has drafted, but not enacted, the EU’s most ambitious telecom autonomy rule. The 24/12/4-hour tiered draft Royal Decree, with an 85% population coverage target including 112 calls, remained at consultation stage on the anniversary, twelve months after the blackout.
  • Portugal’s response is broader. ANACOM has recommended minimum autonomy for network elements, Cell Broadcast, satellite redundancy, and real-time network visibility, while the government has paired telecom recommendations with electricity and critical-infrastructure measures.
  • Operator investment is now part of the policy equation, from Vodafone’s Enhanced Power program to MEO/Altice route-diversity projects. Our data showed that these are the right investment targets; operators with wider or deeper backup-power layers flattened and delayed the outage curve (e.g., MEO), while thinner autonomy produced fast, severe loss of service (e.g., DIGI).
  • Satellite has emerged as a working fallback layer in Iberia, not a theory. Starlink rerouted Spanish gateways through Madrid, London and Milan during the blackout itself, and Portuguese user activity ran roughly 196% above baseline during Storm Kristin in February 2026. This strengthens the case for LEO satellite in emergency kits, government continuity plans, and remote-site backup, but it is not a panacea on its own.

Spain has drafted, but not enacted, the EU’s most ambitious telecom autonomy rule

Spain has gone furthest toward converting the blackout into explicit telecom rules. In December 2025, the Ministry for Digital Transformation opened consultation on a draft Royal Decree on the security and resilience of electronic communications networks and digital infrastructure. The draft classifies telecom networks and selected digital infrastructure as essential in emergencies and applies to telecom operators as well as certain submarine cable, satellite, data center, and internet exchange assets.

The most important shift is that resilience is specified in hours. First-level infrastructure would need at least 24 hours of operation during a power interruption, intermediate sites at least 12 hours, and other sites four hours. For mobile networks, the four-hour requirement must maintain coverage for 85% of the population, with operators able to prioritize voice over data or critical services over higher-capacity layers. The decree also strengthens 112, public-alert, incident-reporting, and coordination obligations.

This is notably sharper than a generic critical-infrastructure designation. It forces operators to classify sites, power paths, and services before the crisis. It also surfaces implementation questions around rooftop weight limits, generator fuel logistics, RAN sharing, and rural refueling. The CNMC’s formal opinion on 12 March 2026 recommended progressive rollout, prioritizing “cost-efficient solutions like inter-network roaming and satellite backup,” and full alignment with NIS2.

Both observations cut to the heart of a regulatory landscape Spain itself has not finalized: the country has not transposed NIS2 (EU cyber-resilience law for essential sectors) and was one of 19 member states to receive a Commission reasoned opinion on 7 May 2025. The cost gap between the government’s €73 million (US$85 million) estimate and operator estimates closer to €300 million (US$351 million) for power hardening has not narrowed. Public consultation closed on 8 January 2026 but, as of the anniversary, the decree had not been promulgated. Energy Minister Sara Aagesen, appearing before the Senate on 23 March 2026, was still asking power companies to publish the underlying outage data.

Portugal’s parliament has set a more operational and structural agenda

Portugal’s response has been less prescriptive at the telecom-site level, but broader across emergency systems. A government summary of the ANACOM blackout report said the prolonged power failure cascaded across fixed and mobile networks, affected 112 access, and constrained emergency communications.

The regulator’s own published recommendations reframed resilience as an operational checklist: minimum autonomy times for batteries and generators, renewable extensions at cell sites, restricted SIM/eSIM access for authorities, 112 routing diversification, and an evolution of public warnings towards Cell Broadcast (the standardized 4G/5G capability to push warning messages to all phones in a defined cell area without an app or sign-up).

The Cell Broadcast recommendation is important. Unlike SMS, Cell Broadcast sends one-to-many alert messages to compatible phones in a targeted radio area, making it better suited to fast public warnings and less exposed to congestion. It still needs powered cell sites, but it is a better emergency-warning tool than individual SMS once networks degrade.

The most consequential update in Portugal, however, came in the anniversary week itself. The cross-party parliamentary working group led by PSD deputy Paulo Moniz published its final report on 23 April 2026, recommending 72 hours of energy autonomy at hospitals, primary health centers, nursing homes and emergency services; 24 hours at all other critical infrastructure; the formal classification of food retailers and pharmacies as critical; and, most pointedly for telecoms, a national emergency alert system independent of commercial mobile networks. The structural separation of public-safety communications from operator-controlled infrastructure is the most ambitious year-two recommendation in either country.

Portugal also had a real-world second test. Between late January and February 2026, Storms Kristin, Leonardo and Marta cut median mobile download speeds by 52% at peak in Speedtest data, with around 40% of telecom failures linked back to electricity loss at mobile sites. ANACOM activated national roaming and Starlink user activity surged ~196% above baseline based on our analysis (with authorities also deploying LEO terminals to remote areas). The episode did not so much reopen Portugal’s policy debate as confirm it.

Operators have outrun both governments

The most concrete Iberian telecom resilience commitments of the past year have come from operators rather than regulators. Vodafone Group’s Enhanced Power initiative, announced on 28 November 2025 with Portugal as its first deployment region, will reinforce more than 10,000 critical sites Europe-wide. Tier specifications include 72 hours of backup or guaranteed refueling within 48 hours at more than 400 mobile data centers, and four hours at aggregation and critical access sites. The initiative is supported by an AI-controlled adaptive power-backup function already live in Greece and in trial in Turkey, which the company says nearly doubles base-station battery duration in certain scenarios.

The day of the blackout itself drew the operator distinction more sharply than any policy document could. MEO’s network peaked at just over 16% of subscribers without service, the best performance observed across either country, because deeper, more widely deployed power reserves materially flattened and delayed its outage curve. NOS peaked at around 30%; Vodafone Portugal at nearly 70%. DIGI’s still-nascent network exhibited a near step-function collapse, with up to 90% of subscribers without coverage for more than a day, pointing to gaps in core network geo-redundancy as well as site-level backup.

Building on this, more recently, Portuguese reporting highlighted MEO’s expansion of its Linda-a-Velha network center and a new Porto landing station intended to improve transatlantic route redundancy. Cellnex, Spain’s tower incumbent and a named addressee of the country’s draft decree, meanwhile reported an integrated approach to UPS, generators and battery banks across more than 120,000 sites in 10 countries, although per-site backup-hour disclosures remain opaque.

Next steps: convert resilience scaffolding into rules

The Iberian blackout exposed three layers of telecom exposure simultaneously: power autonomy at the access network, cross-border interconnection at both energy and transport layers, and the dependence of upstream services on landing stations and gateways that are themselves geographically concentrated. Year one has produced movement on all three, but unevenly.

The European Commission’s proposed Digital Networks Act may help by simplifying rules, supporting satellite services, and improving security cooperation. It will not, by itself, set a uniform backup-power floor for mobile sites. Iberia’s lesson is that national implementation still matters.

Spain has the draft, but a draft is not a rule. Promulgating the December 2025 Royal Decree, or phasing it in along the progressive lines the CNMC has suggested, is the single highest-leverage regulatory move available to either Iberian government in the next twelve months. Portugal’s parliamentary recommendations need to translate from cross-party report to executive action; the proposed national emergency alert channel that does not depend on commercial mobile networks is the most structurally significant call in either country, and would change how public-safety messaging routes through Iberian telecom infrastructure in a future event.

Operators will keep moving voluntarily. But the next phase of resilience policy in Iberia will only be tractable if disclosure quality improves to make per-site backup-hour benchmarking comparable across networks. The same lesson is being drawn in markets that have faced very different stress tests: our analysis of Cyclone Alfred’s impact on Queensland networks reaches the same conclusion from the opposite hemisphere. What gets measured, gets hardened.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 29, 2026

Starlink-powered O2 Satellite Puts the UK at the Front of Europe’s D2D Race

Early Ookla signal scan data shows broad but shallow uptake across UK not-spots, as Ofcom’s first-mover framework turns the market into Europe’s direct-to-device testbed

The UK has become the first country in Western Europe where a smartphone can reach a satellite directly without specialist hardware or a separate app. Virgin Media O2 launched O2 Satellite on February 26, 2026, using SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile constellation over licensed 1800 MHz spectrum, and priced it at £3 per month on Pay Monthly plans or at no extra cost on high-end “Ultimate” tariffs. The launch follows a partnership announced in October 2025 and an Ofcom authorization framework finalized in December 2025.

Analysis of Ookla’s background signal scan data captures that launch from the real-world handset side. Between July 2025 and March 2026, the number of unique monthly UK users registering with a direct-to-device (D2D) satellite rose from negligible early levels to a clearly visible footprint, an order-of-magnitude shift that has already lifted the U.K. from a rounding error in our global D2D dataset to the world’s third-largest market by unique-user count by March 2026, behind only the United States and Australia and ahead of Canada, Chile, and Peru.

Key Takeaways:

  • The UK has quickly become one of the largest detected D2D markets globally, but not one of the deepest. By March 2026, the UK ranked third among countries with live commercial D2D services by detected D2D users, behind the U.S. and Australia, but only eighth by D2D user share and ninth by D2D scans per detected user. In the U.K., the dominant pattern appears to be many users briefly crossing into satellite-eligible conditions, with relatively few remaining on D2D for extended periods.
  • D2D utilization within the UK mobile base reached 0.30% in March 2026 (based on the share of all mobile users coming from D2D), and scans per D2D user averaged four, well below Canada’s 29. The utilization rate matches the US nine months into its T-Mobile service, and within VMO2’s addressable base utilization rises to approximately 1.4%, in line with more mature D2D markets.
  • Geographic concentration tracks the UK’s known coverage gaps. From November 2025 onward, we observed D2D samples lighting up across the Scottish Highlands, the Outer Hebrides, the Welsh uplands, the Southwest peninsula, and the North York Moors, the same areas Ofcom’s Connected Nations 2025 report identifies as all-operator coverage blackspots and that the £1.3 billion Shared Rural Network is committed to closing by January 2027.
  • A multi-operator D2D split is already forming in the UK. VodafoneThree received Ofcom’s second D2D license variation on April 15, 2026 on 900 MHz (Band 8), paired with AST SpaceMobile’s broadband-capable BlueBird satellites through Satellite Connect Europe. BT/EE has not yet announced a D2D handset service and is instead prioritising fixed Starlink broadband. It also appears best placed to support any satellite layer for the UK’s Emergency Services Network, the national communications platform being built to connect police, fire, ambulance and other first responders.

Methodological note: This analysis draws on nine months of Ookla signal scan data from UK Android handsets that registered at least once with a known D2D carrier network between July 2025 and March 2026. Coverage is limited to recent Samsung flagships, reflecting O2’s narrower device support versus more mature D2D services elsewhere. Our data shows O2 Satellite emerging in the data before its public launch on February 26, 2026, then scaling across the first full month of commercial availability.


O2 Satellite was already ramping before the public launch

Virgin Media O2 announced its Starlink Direct to Cell (D2C) partnership on October 30, 2025, describing O2 Satellite as a service that would initially provide messaging and data, work automatically in areas without traditional O2 coverage, and aim to raise O2 landmass coverage from 89% to more than 95% within 12 months of launch. The same announcement said internal trials were already underway.

Analysis of our background signal scan data offers the first clear empirical sign of a structured internal rollout becoming visible in passive measurement before any public announcement. UK detected D2D users were essentially negligible and flat between July and October 2025. In November, during the period in which VMO2 publicly noted that its employees were “already using the technology in real-world conditions across the country,” we captured a sharp inflection in usage, with activity moving well above the Q3 2025 baseline by the end of 2025.

UK D2D activity jumped twice before and after launch
Ookla Background Signal Scans | United Kingdom, July 2025 to March 2026 | Q3 2025 average = 1x

The second inflection landed in February 2026, when Ofcom granted VMO2 its first D2D license variation on 17 February. The Exemption Regulations came into force on February 25th, and the consumer service switched on the following day. As a result, detected D2D activity stepped up again in both February and March post-launch and is now scaling further.

The UK’s early D2D usage is broad, but still shallow

The UK ranked third globally by unique D2D users by March 2026 in our dataset, with 11% of the world’s tracked D2D user count, behind the U.S. at 37% and Australia at 14%. It sits ahead of Peru, Canada, Chile, Ukraine, New Zealand, Puerto Rico, and Japan. On scan volume the UK is sixth, a more modest figure that reflects how recently the O2 service launched and how little behavioral load each UK user is yet carrying.

UK ranks third by detected D2D user share, but scans-per-user remain low
Ookla Background Signal Scans | March 2026, Speedtest-derived

To clarify, a unique detected user means a device appeared on a D2D network (like Starlink Mobile) at least once in the month. Scans per detected user indicate how much repeat background activity (or usage of the D2D service) those detected users generated.

In the context of the UK data, this means the initial D2D service is appearing across a meaningful detected user base, but each detected user is generating relatively few satellite scans. For example, one user might take a long trip into the backcountry, generating lots of scans over the course of days. Another user might briefly link to a satellite during a walk in the country, generating only one scan. Both are considered unique D2D users, but one generates far more scans. That points to short or intermittent satellite registrations, a fallback service that appears at the edge of terrestrial coverage (which may be less likely to be encountered frequently in the U.K. compared to other large landmass countries due to the very high level of urbanization, see below), and a product that is still constrained by few supported devices (only the two most recent generations of Samsung flagships are supported), supported apps, outdoor use, and the requirement for an open view of the sky.

It would be premature to read scan depth alone as a direct measure of user engagement or paying customers at this early stage. Background scan cadence, device mix, app eligibility, operating-system behavior, and movement patterns all affect the data. Even so, the cross-country contrast is large enough to be analytically useful here. In the U.K., the dominant pattern appears to be many users briefly crossing into satellite-eligible conditions, with relatively few remaining on D2D for extended periods. Penetration within the mobile base (based on the share of all signal scans) reached 0.30% in March 2026, compared with 0.46% in the U.S., 0.70% in Canada, 1.26% in Chile, and 1.91% in New Zealand. That places U.K. penetration at roughly the level the U.S. had reached within its first nine months of service. Within VMO2’s addressable base, and assuming our background scans distribute across U.K. operators in approximate proportion to their mobile market share, penetration rises to approximately 1.4% in March 2026, closer to more established markets despite only six weeks of commercial service.

The contrast with the U.S. and Canada is instructive. Both those markets have seen D2D user counts fall since summer 2025, by 17% and 48% respectively through March 2026, coinciding with T-Mobile and Rogers ending their initial free-trial D2D tiers and moving to pricing gated by high-tier plans. VMO2 launched with a £3 bolt-on and free inclusion on its Ultimate tariffs from day one. The U.K. model therefore likely avoids the drop that free-trial expiration has produced in mature markets, though whether that pricing structure holds as the service scales beyond the early-adopter cohort is an open question. Seasonality is also likely to matter: outdoor travel and recreation typically dip in winter and should be watched again through spring and summer 2026.

The geospatial pattern shows D2D forming at the edge of O2’s network

Analysis of the geospatial distribution of the U.K. D2D usage shows three phases between November 2025 and March 2026. In November and December, the footprint was sparse and more concentrated in southern and eastern England (likely reflecting early testing), including areas closer to higher population density and travel corridors. By January and February, detections had spread more clearly into Wales, the Midlands, northern England, and Scotland (concentrated in the areas that Ofcom’s Connected Nations reports identify as the U.K.’s most coverage-constrained, which also happen to be popular for outdoor activities).

This pattern is important because it complicates the idea that D2D demand is only about the most remote places. O2 Satellite works where the main O2 network is unavailable and satellite coverage is available (notably excluding the major indoor cellular coverage gaps that persist), which means it can matter in partial not-spots as well as total not-spots. A partial not-spot can still be a real coverage gap for an O2 customer, even if another mobile operator has terrestrial service there. In practical terms, a hillwalking route, coastal road, or visitor-heavy rural area can be a D2D use case even when it is not a vast wilderness.

In Scotland, D2D usage clusters have been observed in Argyll and Bute, the Northwest Highlands, the Inner Hebrides, and the Outer Hebrides. Ofcom’s latest figures put Scotland at 89% 4G coverage from at least one operator and 65% from all four, the lowest in the U.K., and parts of the Highlands and Islands still sit materially below that average. These are the places where a satellite-to-phone overlay has the most work to do, and they show up distinctly in our data.

A second cluster runs through Wales, concentrating in Powys, Gwynedd, and mid-Ceredigion. A third picks up across the Southwest peninsula, particularly North Devon, Exmoor, Bodmin Moor, and West Cornwall. A fourth sits across the North of England, across the Yorkshire Dales, the North York Moors, Northumberland, and parts of the Lake District. The East Anglian coast and the Lincolnshire Wolds complete the rural pattern.

This is why the overlap with Shared Rural Network target areas matters. The SRN is the £1.3 billion joint program between the four U.K. operators and government designed to raise all-operator 4G coverage to 89.2% of U.K. landmass by January 2027, with Scotland and Wales carrying the largest share of the uplift. As of the 2025 update, Extended Area Service site deployments are contributing an additional 0.25% to 1% of UK landmass coverage across operators, and 40 Scottish SRN sites are now live.

Our data suggests that for many of the same locations, D2D is now delivering a first-layer (albeit highly constrained in its current form) connectivity experience well before the SRN timeline concludes. This helps explain why early U.K. detections can appear around populated and visitor-heavy regions rather than only in the least populated parts of the country. The relevant question is not simply where the U.K. is empty but where compatible O2 customers, outdoor use, travel patterns, coastal and upland activity, and O2-specific terrestrial gaps overlap.

O2’s own launch framing points to that same use case. The operator described the service as helping users when hiking, climbing, doing water sports, sailing, or traveling in rural, coastal, and remote locations. The early geospatial evidence fits that edge-coverage proposition better than it fits a pure wilderness-connectivity proposition (aligning with trends we observed in the U.S. previously, where D2D usage skews toward national parks and popular hiking areas).

European geography makes D2D different from Australia, Canada, Chile, and Peru

As mentioned, the U.K.’s early D2D usage profile looks different from lower-density and more geographically expansive markets. World Bank data puts the U.K. at about 283 people per km2 in 2023, compared with about 3.5 in Australia, 4.6 in Canada, 26.5 in Chile, and 26.4 in Peru. The U.K. also has a much smaller land area than those markets and a dense pattern of towns, roads, and transport corridors.

That matters for D2D because the U.K.’s commercial opportunity is not primarily about bringing basic connectivity to vast unserved interiors. Instead, it is about filling residual gaps in a market where terrestrial mobile networks already cover most outdoor premises and much of the country’s landmass, but where rural, coastal, upland, road, indoor, and operator-specific gaps remain highly consequential for users.

This makes O2 Satellite (and future competing D2D services in the U.K. and elsewhere in Europe) strategically different from a terrestrial substitute. O2 says the service lifts its landmass coverage from 89% to 95%, equivalent to an area around two-thirds the size of Wales. But O2 Satellite is not equivalent to Ofcom’s good-quality 4G coverage definition, which includes a sustained 2 Mbps downlink and the ability to sustain a 90-second voice call. O2’s own public help page confirms that standard text messaging and standard voice calls, including emergency calls, are not currently supported on O2 Satellite, and that 999 texts and government emergency alerts are similarly unavailable while connected to the service. This distinction matters commercially (especially for the towerco business model) and politically, since it means satellite coverage is not yet interchangeable with terrestrial mobile coverage such as that delivered by the SRN. That will very likely change as D2D solutions become more capable.

Ofcom’s framework turned U.K. D2D into a first-mover licensable mobile service

The U.K.’s D2D market was the first in Western Europe because the U.K.’s regulator acted first. Ofcom’s December 2025 statement set out a framework for authorizing D2D in mobile spectrum that was the earliest in any European country and broadly followed the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Supplemental Coverage from Space model in the U.S., though it extended authorization across a wider set of eligible bands, including 700 MHz, 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1400 MHz, 1800 MHz, 2.1 GHz, and 2.6 GHz.

The authorization works through two instruments. The first is a license exemption for handsets and SIM-enabled devices, made under section 8(3) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006, which came into force on February 25, 2026 (applying in the U.K. and territorial seas, excluding the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man). The second is a variation to each mobile network operator’s existing wireless telegraphy license to add a D2D schedule on specific bands. VMO2 received the first such variation on 17 February 2026 on 1800 MHz (Band 3).

This spectrum choice has important operational consequences. Band 3 is a mainstream global LTE and 5G carrier, supported on almost every modern smartphone, which means handset compatibility for O2 Satellite is effectively a question of which devices VMO2 whitelists rather than which devices can physically receive the signal.

The date sequence also shows how directly regulation shaped launch timing. Ofcom received Telefónica (O2 owner) UK’s completed application on January 28, 2026, published notice of its intent to vary the license on February 4, approved the variation on February 12, made the exemption regulations on February 16, and said those regulations were intended to come into effect on February 25. O2 launched O2 Satellite on February 26.

The UK is moving from first launch to competitive testbed

O2 has a first-mover advantage in U.K. D2D, but it is unlikely to remain the only U.K. D2D architecture for long. On April 15, 2026, Ofcom granted a second D2D license variation to VodafoneThree on 900 MHz Band 8, authorizing a service that will run over AST SpaceMobile’s BlueBird satellites through the Satellite Connect Europe joint venture Vodafone Group and AST announced in early 2025. VodafoneThree has said customer trials will begin in summer 2026, with commercial launch targeted for the end of the year.

VodafoneThree is positioning its upcoming D2D service around data, voice, and SMS, which differs from O2’s current app-based data proposition and lack of standard voice and SMS. That reflects a constraint of Starlink’s large first-generation constellation, which is optimised for LTE messaging and low-throughput data, but should improve materially as V2 satellites add more capable payloads, greater cell capacity, and a broader spectrum base to support richer handset services.

The use of the 900 MHz band for VodafoneThree’s service also creates a different radio and device context from O2’s 1800 MHz implementation, although real-world performance will depend on satellite payloads, beam design, power limits, device support, software behavior, and interference constraints as much as on frequency alone.

Taken together, this means that the U.K. could become one of the first markets where two satellite-to-smartphone models are tested under the same national regulator, but with different operator spectrum positions, satellite partners, service propositions, and launch timing.

BT, which runs the U.K.’s largest mobile network through EE, has taken a different path. It announced a Starlink partnership in early 2026, but only for fixed home broadband to hard-to-reach premises, not for D2D handset services. That positions BT as the natural incumbent for any Emergency Services Network satellite D2D overlay, particularly because ESN is designed around resilient nationwide coverage for police, fire, ambulance, and other public safety users. The UK Space Agency opened a formal industry call on this in January 2026, but EE is still left without a consumer D2D handset product at a moment when its two largest mobile competitors are both moving.

The MVNO layer adds a further wrinkle, with Sky Mobile, Tesco Mobile, and Giffgaff on VMO2 and iD Mobile and SMARTY on VodafoneThree, each a potential future D2D reseller.

Europe still has to solve the harmonization question

The UK moved quickly because Ofcom created a national authorization route for D2D in mobile spectrum. The European Union is working through a more complex harmonization problem.

The Radio Spectrum Policy Group’s June 2025 D2D opinion was explicit about that tension. It said that D2D in harmonized ECS mobile bands is currently not possible in EU Member State ECS licenses, because those licenses and technical harmonization decisions were built for terrestrial mobile use. The RSPG recommended that the European Commission issue a mandate to CEPT to develop harmonized technical conditions for D2D-IMT satellite operations in ECS harmonized bands, with follow-up after WRC-27.

The WRC-27 link is important because Agenda Item 1.13 will test the global framework for connecting satellites directly to ordinary IMT handsets through mobile-satellite service allocations, including how those services can coexist with terrestrial mobile networks in bands between 694/698 MHz and 2.7 GHz.

This matters for operators and satellite providers because D2D becomes much more valuable when roaming, interference management, device support, emergency service obligations, lawful intercept, privacy, competition, and market access can be handled consistently across borders. That cross-border layer is now moving from theory into commercial reality, with Rogers extending satellite-to-mobile roaming for Canadian customers in the U.S. and KDDI expanding au Starlink Direct roaming from the U.S. to Canada, the Philippines, and New Zealand from June 2026.

The issue also intersects with the European Commission’s separate assessment of the future use of the EU 2 GHz MSS band, where current authorisations for Viasat and EchoStar expire in May 2027. That band is central to broader debates about 3GPP NTN, MSS continuity, potential new entrants, and European strategic autonomy, but would require new handsets to put into action.

The U.K. is therefore both ahead of much of Europe and still linked to European outcomes. Cross-border coordination, WRC-27 decisions, CEPT technical conditions, satellite market-access safeguards, and the availability of compatible devices will all shape how quickly D2D scales from national firsts to mass-market coverage features.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 28, 2026

In Search of the World’s Fastest In-Flight Wi-Fi

Airlines adopting Starlink are changing the customer experience on commercial airlines

Which airline offers the fastest in-flight Wi-Fi? It’s a simple question with an increasingly important answer. As our lives become more “always connected,” the frustration of poor or non-existent connectivity becomes more acute. We have reached a point where the quality of in-flight connectivity (IFC) can be a decisive factor for passengers choosing flights and airlines based on their digital experience. For airlines, providing high-quality Wi-Fi is no longer just a perk – now it is a critical driver of passenger loyalty.

Key takeaways

  • The “LEO-Divide” is reshaping the competitive airspace: A clear performance gap has emerged between the “haves” and “have-nots” of low-Earth orbit (LEO) connectivity. Airlines achieving over 90% speed consistency—such as airBaltic (98.3%), WestJet (95.8%), and Hawaiian Airlines (95.3%)—are almost exclusively serviced by Starlink. Carriers currently trapped below the 50% consistency threshold now face a distinct competitive disadvantage.
  • Starlink’s worst day vs. the competition’s best: The scale of Starlink’s disruption is best seen in the 10th percentile data: Starlink’s slowest users still experienced faster internet than the average user on any other satellite network. In just two years, Starlink has captured nearly 48% of the commercial Speedtest sample share.
  • The performance “Rubik’s Cube”: Solving for the world’s fastest Wi-Fi is a complex puzzle involving three moving parts: satellite backhaul, fleet-wide hardware mix, and internal router technology. Airlines must manage this end-to-end stack to avoid where superior satellite speeds are bottlenecked by older in-cabin hardware that constrains the Wi-Fi network performance.
  • Loyalty is the Ultimate Stake: In-flight Wi-Fi has caught up to traditional airline service metrics in terms of passenger satisfaction. As airlines move toward free, high-speed models, IFC is no longer just a luxury perk—it is a powerful loyalty lever and a critical tool for digital engagement in a “churn-resistant” customer journey.

This article builds on research published in Starlink Elevates In-Flight Wi-Fi Performance and is based on Ookla® Speedtest Intelligence® data and airline Wi-Fi network names.

Speed ingredients: a satellite, a Wi-Fi router and an airplane

Often a simple question — Which airline Wi-Fi is fastest? — needs a nuanced and complex answer. These are the key variables in the equation that predict the performance of the in-flight Wi-Fi network.

  • The satellite. Using terrestrial internet for an analogy, DSL (digital subscriber line) is to GEO (Geostationary Orbit) satellite connectivity as fiber is to LEO (low Earth orbit). Starlink operates a LEO satellite constellation and more LEO competition is coming. Prior to Starlink’s ascent, the connectivity for in-flight Wi-Fi service mainly came from GEO (Geostationary Orbit) satellites. When compared to an airplane cruising at 35,000 feet, a LEO satellite is just 50 times higher while a GEO is over 3,000 times higher. That’s one reason for Starlink’s performance advantage.
  • The router. Just as cellular has 4G and 5G, Wi-Fi has technology generations, too. And, as we already intuitively understand, the newer technology generation has better performance than its predecessor. With our smartphones, we know we have a 5G phone and 5G connection — the phone shows us and the mobile provider marketers remind us. Yet, when we connect to Wi-Fi, which Wi-Fi is it? Some airplanes have older Wi-Fi routers and some have newer ones – this matters.
  •  The airplane. Performance is tied to the specific airplane, not the airline, because hardware (satellite providers and Wi-Fi router generations) varies among and within airlines. The airplane serves as the physical nexus for the IFC and Wi-Fi router. Although Speedtest data cannot isolate specific airplanes (network names are airline-specific), this hardware variability is an important performance factor.

Fast enough In-Flight Connectivity (IFC)

We analyzed more than 50 airlines for the consistency of their in-flight Wi-Fi service based on a dual-threshold of 25 Mbps download speed and 3 Mbps upload speed (25/3 Mbps) as the practical requirements for digital productivity and entertainment. Speeds above 25 Mbps supports a buffer-free experience for High-Definition (HD) video streaming, smooth loading of content-heavy web pages, and the reliable handling of larger email attachments. And a consistent 3 Mbps upload speed helps for maintaining responsive connections to cloud-based work applications like Slack and shared cloud drives.

Wi-Fi Consistency by Airline
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025, % of samples at least 25 Mbps download speed and 3 Mbps upload speed

Note: For airlines with multiple IFC providers, a weighted average was calculated.

airBaltic (98.3%) ranked highest in delivering consistency in 2H 2025, closely followed by WestJet (95.8%) and Hawaiian Airlines (95.3%), with Air France (93.7%) joining the over-90% consistency leaders.

Qatar Airways (87.6%), Air Canada (84.6%) and Alaska Airlines (81.6%) comprised the second group of high-ranking consistency scores.

United (63.7%) and Emirates (53.7%) joined the club of airlines with over half of Speedtests above the 25/3 Mbps grade. Nearly all of these airlines with consistencies above 50% had something in common – Starlink. With the exception of Air Canada, which relies on Intelsat for its in-flight Wi-Fi service, every airline in this group had a meaningful proportion of its IFC provided by Starlink. Moreover, the top three airlines – airBaltic, WestJet and Hawaiian Airlines – were solely serviced by Starlink, while no airline below 50% had Starlink as its IFC provider. United, Emirates, British Airways (25.0%), Southwest (9.2%), and SAS (4.9%) are examples of airlines that are shifting their fleet’s IFC to Starlink in order to realize the speed and latency advantages of LEO. Singapore Airlines (21.0%) is also expected to follow suit. (Will Singapore Airlines’ rival Cathay Pacific (23.6%) follow the same flight path?) 

Further, following the same LEO logic, jetBlue (3.8%) and Delta (2.2%) will be expecting to improve their consistencies, having both announced deals with Amazon Leo for 2027 and 2028, respectively. Amazon Leo (fka Amazon Project Kuiper), a subsidiary of Amazon, is in the process of launching a constellation of LEO satellites to provide broadband internet connectivity. For the aviation industry, Amazon Leo has touted its capabilities to deliver gigabit speed to the aircraft.

Besides airlines swapping out IFC hardware and services in existing fleets, manufacturers Boeing and Airbus modularly configure new airplanes coming off the line for IFC providers. For example, satellite connectivity company Viasat will work more closely with Boeing on hardware design and function, and Air India recently selected Hughes for its IFC supplied by Airbus HBCplus (High Bandwidth Connectivity Plus). These types of deals between the airlines and the suppliers enable and accelerate the diffusion of better-quality in-flight Wi-Fi.  

The skies are blue for the future of IFC consistency.

Fast-break download speeds

Given all of these connectivity provider migrations happening and the mixed IFC provider picture, declaring a “fastest airline” is a blurry proposition. However, this transition and mix provides the opportunity for discrete analysis of the performance differences between the IFC providers behind the top consistency airlines in the simple terms of download speed.

Speediest Airlines and Connectivity Providers Download Speeds
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025, median

Whereas the consistency metric is a minimum data-speed benchmark for a basic customer experience, the metric of median download speed reveals insight into the network capacity that is available to offer a good or great customer experience for everyone on the flight.

As with the highest consistency IFC airlines, Starlink stood out for its speed. Of over 50 airlines evaluated, the eight airlines that exceeded 100 Mbps median download speed and half of those clocking over 300 Mbps in 2H 2025 (see chart) were served by Starlink. No other IFC provider approached triple-digit speeds. Conversely, no airline with Starlink was below 100 Mbps median download speed. 

Intelsat (46.99 – 65.08 Mbps) and Viasat (56.84 Mbps) demonstrated good median download speeds among the top consistency airlines, well above the consistency metric minimum of 25 Mbps. (Intelsat is owned by satellite company SES. Viasat acquired Inmarsat in 2023, and both appear separately in Speedtest data.) 

The median download speeds for SITA (a ground-to-air solution only found on Qatar Airways in Speedtest data), Inmarsat, Panasonic Avionics, and Deutsche Telekom (also a ground-to-air based network) all performed poorly by this measure. (Panasonic Avionics is not a satellite operator. Rather, it provides in-flight Wi-Fi service and entertainment solutions via the connectivity of its partnerships with Eutelsat OneWeb and Spacesail.)

A rising Starlink

The consistency and download speed performance results of Starlink’s IFC are game changing. And, not coincidentally, numerous airlines are, or are planning to, upgrade their IFC to Starlink (including: United, Emirates, British Airways, Southwest, and SAS). 

Starlink started offering commercial in-flight Wi-Fi when Hawaiian Airlines first deployed it in February 2024. In just two years, Starlink captured almost half of the commercial airline passenger Speedtest sample share (47.8%) by Q4 2025. 

Viasat (25.1%) and Panasonic Avionics (12.8%) held the second and third largest share. Inmarsat and Intelsat were the next two largest providers according to Speedtest samples with 3.2% and 3.0% shares, respectively, part of All others (14.3%).

Not just taking share, however, Starlink’s increased availability allowed it to gain its share leadership by growing the overall total number of Speedtest samples. Airlines and passengers are realizing that in-flight connectivity is loyalty lever and service expectation, driving its proliferation.

No slowing down

Starlink In-Flight Wi-Fi Speeds
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q2 2

Recall that the threshold for the consistency metric is 25 Mbps download speed and 3 Mbps upload speed. Starlink’s 10th percentile download speed – that is, 90% of Speedtest samples were faster – only got as low as 48.00 Mbps in Q2 2025, and stayed around twice as fast as the 25 Mbps threshold every quarter. Likewise, its 10th percentile upload speed was consistently around 10 to 13 Mbps, more than triple the 3 Mbps mark . 

Sometimes when wireless networks experience rapid growth, the increased number of users and larger volume of data traffic can result in slower speeds for everyone. This has not been the case for Starlink. Over the past two years, it has maintained a solid minimum speed performance on the slower end of in-flight Speedtest samples (10th percentile) while increasing its median (50th percentile) and top-end speeds (90th percentile). This reflects Starlink’s broadband performance trends found globally in Ookla Research reports.

(Source: Starlink Progress Report 2025)

Starlink’s satellite constellation has grown along with its capacity, keeping up with, or even ahead of, its customer growth. This tightly correlates with the data we see in our Speedtest sample growth and data speed performance.

Reaching for the Starlinks

In-Flight Wi-Fi Provider Performance | Speeds and Latency
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

Digging deeper into the individual in-flight Wi-Fi provider performances does little to change the Starlink-led narrative.

Starlink was so much faster than its competitors that even its worst performance was better than their typical service. For download speeds, Starlink’s slowest users still got faster internet (63.71 Mbps at the 10th percentile) than the average user on any other satellite network. This lead was even greater when it came to upload speeds; Starlink’s bottom 10th percentile (11.73 Mbps) were nearly as fast as the top users on Intelsat’s network (13.84 Mbps) and were significantly faster than everyone else. Essentially, Starlink on its worst day was better than its rivals on their best day.

Despite the gap to Starlink, Intelsat still provided usable Wi-Fi even at its 10th percentile download (21.06 Mbps) and upload (4.13 Mbps) speeds. Viasat, too, for its download speed, mostly delivered usable Wi-Fi connectivity with a 10th percentile at 13.95 Mbps. 

Latency comparisons are overwhelmed by the physical distance difference of LEO and GEO. (For an airplane at cruising altitude, LEO is 50 times higher while a GEO is over 3,000 times higher). Starlink’s slower 10th percentile (133 ms) multi-server latency was still quicker than the better 90th percentile latencies of most other providers. Interestingly, Intelsat and Inmarsat exhibited better 90th percentiles (144 ms, 83 ms), possibly evidence of MEO (medium earth orbit) or LEO partnerships.

The opportunity in Wi-Fi routers

Along with the airlines (and airplanes) and the IFC providers, the generation of the Wi-Fi router adds another layer of complexity to our examination of the world’s fastest in-flight Wi-Fi. 

We found that Wi-Fi 5 had the majority share of Speedtest samples at 81%, followed by Wi-Fi 6 a little over 11% and legacy Wi-Fi 4 lurking with nearly 8%. Wi-Fi 5 came around in the early years of 4G LTE as it was taking off for the mobile operators. Wi-Fi 6 arrived just as 5G was launching. Wi-Fi 4, on the other hand, dates back to just prior to 4G LTE – yes, 3G.

In-Flight Wi-Fi Generation Mix
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

Wi-Fi 7, introduced in 2024, is the latest generation commercially available today. However, relative to the time and expense of upgrading fleets of airplanes, no Wi-Fi 7 was expected and none was found among our Speedtest data. (Indeed, Wi-Fi 7 adoption in the consumer residential environment is just underway in many regions that Ookla Research has examined: Europe, Middle East, Latin America, United States and Canada.)

A mix of Wi-Fi generations across IFC providers and airlines can get complicated.These multiple input variables are a virtual Rubik’s Cube in trying to solve for the best experience. To simplify, the cheat code is – maybe this is obvious – Wi-Fi 6 and LEO provide the best results; Wi-Fi 4 and GEO the worst.

Wi-Fi Generation Performance for In-flight Wi-Fi
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

The difference in the performance of Wi-Fi generations is clear and consistent across the Speedtest sample results. In each metric, the progressions in speeds and latency follow the Wi-Fi generations. The median download speed on Wi-Fi 6 is over six-times faster than on Wi-Fi 4. The median upload speed is over four-times faster; and the median multi-server latency is less than half.

In-flight Providers and Wi-Fi Generations

Returning to the metric of consistency (where the Speedtest samples are faster than 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload speeds), the percentages crossing this threshold by Wi-Fi generation were:

  • Wi-Fi 4 = 14.9%
  • Wi-Fi 5 = 28.8%
  • Wi-Fi 6 = 56.9%

The IFC provider is foundational to the performance underlying the Wi-Fi router, and each provider has a different mix of Speedtest samples on each generation.

Wi-Fi Generation Mix by Provider
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

Intelsat (22.0%) and Starlink (18.7%) had the most in-flight Wi-Fi Speedtest samples on the faster Wi-Fi 6 generation gear. Conversely, Panasonic Avionics (32.3%) and Inmarsat (28.0%) had the most Speedtest samples on slower Wi-Fi 4.

To understand how older Wi-Fi generation equipment hinders the customer experience, we examine the download speeds for Starlink, where the “pipe” is wider such that the Wi-Fi  performance differences are challenged; and Viasat with a robust mix of Speedtest samples across Wi-Fi generations on a single provider.

Starlink and Viasat Download Speeds by Wi-Fi Generation
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

In both IFC provider cases, the Wi-Fi generation makes a difference in download speed. Moving from Wi-Fi 5 to Wi-Fi 6 increased Starlink’s median speed by approximately 24% (from 140.35 Mbps to 173.86 Mbps).

Viasat showed a steady climb from Wi-Fi 4 (26.30 Mbps) to Wi-Fi 6 (57.02 Mbps). Moreover, the 10th percentile user experience floor for Starlink was 39% higher, and for Viasat going from Wi-Fi 4 to Wi-Fi 6 more than doubled this measurement (from 11.15 Mbps to 25.64 Mbps).

Airlines and Wi-Fi Generations

Returning to the Consistency metric once more:

  • In airlines where Wi-Fi 4 is at least one-third of samples, overall Consistency averaged 15.0%
  • In airlines with any Wi-Fi 4 Speedtest samples, the overall Consistency averaged 22.1%
  • For all Wi-Fi generations, the overall Consistency averaged 27.0%
  • In airlines with any Wi-Fi 6 Speedtest samples, the overall Consistency averaged 39.1%

Airline Speedtest Sample Mix by Wi-Fi Generation
Speedtest Intelligence® | 2H 2025

Lagging behind many of the cruise lines’ Wi-Fi generation mix, there is a range from where some airlines have a majority of Speedtest samples on Wi-Fi 4 while others have a majority on Wi-Fi 6. Wi-Fi 4 replacement is an opportunity to improve the customer experience, which is likely to happen in concert with changing the IFC provider.

Game changed: from a connectivity to customer loyalty

Competition to Starlink is coming, but the aforementioned Amazon Leo IFC won’t appear until next year. Existing providers are making deals and improvements to respond – these take time as well. Is there time?

Difficult to say, but whether due to Starlink’s growth or other providers’ improvements, passenger satisfaction with in-flight Wi-Fi is catching up to other customer experience factors. As we noted last year, in-flight Wi-Fi ranked lower than the proverbial lowest bar of airline food. Now, in the latest travel study from the American Customer Satisfaction Index, “Customer-facing technology like in-flight Wi-Fi and enhanced flight information systems show notable gains.”

(Source: ACSI Travel Study 2026. © 2026 American Customer Satisfaction Index LLC. All rights reserved)

Customer satisfaction with in-flight Wi-Fi (79) is now on par with in-flight beverage and food (79), but at least is beating seat comfort (76). (And, passengers with higher quality in-flight Wi-Fi will have their own options for in-flight entertainment (78).)

In-flight Wi-Fi is now a customer loyalty lever. This experience with a recent Alaska Airlines flight illustrates a deliberate, proactive management of the customer journey of communications and technology touch points. 

(Source: Alaska Airlines <no-reply@notifications.alaskaair.com>)

The above email was received by the passenger well-ahead of the flight (morning email; evening flight), informing that the Wi-Fi might not be working on the flight. This offered plenty of time to download any entertainment or prepare for offline work before the flight. In fact, it turned out that Wi-Fi was available.

In-flight passenger Wi-Fi, just recently a nice-to-have and now a requirement, makes for sticky, churn-resistant customers for airlines. (And for mobile consumers alike – for example, mobile operator T-Mobile has supported free in-flight Wi-Fi as a perk for its customers on select airlines, including Alaska Airlines, for many years.) 

Airlines know this. United, for example, even ran a Super Bowl ad for “Wi-Fi that actually works.” The in-flight Wi-Fi is an opportunity to not only provide a quality connectivity service, it is also a vehicle for higher customer engagement. The passenger signing into the airline’s Wi-Fi is now a more-valuable, virtual captive audience, as well as a literal one. But if the experience is poor and there are other choices in flights or airlines, passenger loyalty will be tested.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 30, 2026

The Hardest Working Cell Site in Miami

Ahead of the Wireless Infrastructure Association’s (WIA) Connect (X) trade show in Miami, May 4-6, Ookla data highlights the city’s cell site showing the highest traffic strain.

As any wireless engineer knows, cellular networks are a shared resource. And they can get bogged down when lots of people share that resource at the same time.

Network speeds offer one clear way to measure the degree of that strain. When speeds slow for everyone, that’s typically an indication that the network itself is getting pushed beyond its design parameters.

But there are many factors at play here. As users travel across the network, and through the steps of their day, cellular traffic can ripple like a summer wind, sometimes blustery and sometimes tranquil.

Ookla data highlights the undulation of this kind of cellular usage, showing how it changes throughout the days, weeks and years – and through the hours of every day – in ways that can stress even the best-placed cell sites.

Key takeaways:

  • Aggregated mobile network speeds across Miami have risen more than 26% over the past few years, reaching 187.83 Mbps in 2026, according to Speedtest Intelligence® data. This corresponds to a similar increase in the number of people living in the city.
  • This overall rise in mobile speeds is underpinned by mobile network performance that can change on a minute-by-minute basis. For example, on a typical Tuesday in the first quarter of 2026, mobile network speeds across Miami rose to a high of 296.05 Mbps at 6 a.m. and fell to a low of 158.19 Mbps at 9 p.m. This variance reflects the ebb and flow of daily mobile data demand among users.
  • In a survey of almost 3,000 cell sites across Miami, Ookla identified the cell site showing the highest effect of traffic load on throughput: the site with the most data strain. It’s just north of the airport – not a surprise, given the unique demands placed on wireless networks by airport travelers.
  • These findings help highlight the constantly changing cellular landscape that wireless networking engineers must wend each day. And they must do so amid a rapidly evolving digital landscape – stretching from email to TikTok – with the shadow of AI looming over virtually everything.

Welcome to Miami

The Miami metropolitan area is one of the fastest-growing urban centers in the U.S. The population across the Miami metro area grew from 5.8 million people to 6.4 million people over the past 10 years. This rapid, sustained expansion places a significant and ongoing load on the city’s infrastructure, including its wireless networks.

However, the pressure this growth has placed onto the city’s cellular grid cannot easily be seen from a distance.

Median Mobile Download Speeds in Miami
Speedtest Intelligence | All providers | 2023-2026

Broadly, cellular speeds in Miami and elsewhere in the U.S. are on the rise, when considering the situation across the span of years. That’s due to more efficient cellular technologies (like 5G) as well as a wide range of other factors ranging from increased cell site density to the deployment of additional spectrum to more capable cellular radios – the list goes on.

But those results are clear only with perspective, across years of study. By looking at hourly network performance data, the situation is much different. As Floridians rise and go about their day, they naturally turn to their devices for everything from emails in the morning to TikToks during lunch to Netflix in the evening. And those activities can pressure mobile networks throughout Miami and beyond.

Broadly, this data highlights the typical rising and falling pattern of mobile network traffic loads – the digital breathing of a community sharing the resource of wireless.

Cell towers are hard

Constructing and maintaining cellular infrastructure remains a significant hurdle for the wireless industry. After all, building a single terrestrial cell tower in a remote location in the U.S. can cost $200,000 or more. That expense becomes significant considering the 3 million square miles of territory U.S. wireless providers work to cover. 

No wonder the WIA counted just under 639,000 structures supporting wireless infrastructure across the U.S. at the end of last year. That count covers 158,500 purpose-built cellular towers and 198,100 outdoor small cells, as well as broadcast TV and radio towers, water towers, rooftops, church steeples, billboards, utility poles, farm silos, and other buildings. 

Broadly, the WIA estimates the U.S. mobile industry collectively spent a total of $65 billion last year on wireless networks and network-related costs, including construction, maintenance, and operations. These costs are exacerbated by a maturing industry that can no longer rely on subscriber growth alone, especially as the cost of winning new customers rises.

Similarly, cell tower operators also face a complex landscape of location-based challenges. Some existing cell sites may not be optimally situated for demand, or may not be capable of supporting the modern cellular equipment required for 5G. This necessitates a constant cycle of densification and equipment upgrades to meet the massive demand for mobile data, which reached 132 trillion megabytes in 2024, according to the CTIA.

Further, a persistent irony in the business centers on local communities that demand high-quality cellular coverage while simultaneously blocking the permits required to build the necessary infrastructure. This sentiment – summarized as “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY) – can stretch across everything from apartments to commercial developments to data centers. But there’s a certain contradiction in people using their mobile devices to read stories about the very cell towers they are working to block in their neighborhoods.

Nonetheless, the cell tower industry in general has been successful in expanding its reach.

For example, according to Speedtest Intelligence, the general availability of mobile service among all providers in the U.S. rose from 97.8% in 2023 to 98.7% in 2026.

Miamians, meet your hardest working site 

The Miami cell site with the greatest daily traffic load sits on the north side of the Miami International Airport. As you might imagine, we’re not going to identify the exact location of this site due to security issues.

The site’s location doesn’t come as a surprise. Airports are notoriously hard on wireless networks, given the high number of travelers passing through airports on a daily basis, all using their phones for calls, work activities and catching up on their favorite streaming shows.

Further, airports present a unique wireless engineering challenge because they must support bursty traffic loads as airplanes land and travelers immediately switch on their device from airplane mode in order to check the time, weather, and where the Uber stand is. This creates sudden, large demands on network resources.

But how exactly did we conclude that this particular cell site is the one with the greatest traffic load in the greater Miami area? I’m glad you asked.

First, we scoured all 2,912 estimated cell site locations in the Miami metro area. These locations are determined by an algorithmic interpretation of signal strength data.

Then, we looked at Speedtest Consumer Quality of Experience (QoE) analytics from the fourth quarter of 2025 to the first quarter of 2026 on an aggregated, hourly basis, calculating the cell sites showing the greatest dip in speeds, as well as traffic load intensity, frequency of slowdowns, and load causality. Unlike consumer-initiated Speedtest data – which primarily captures throughput at a single point in time – CQoE data is collected throughout the day in the background as consumers naturally use their devices.

The results, for this particular site, look like this:

Into the future

Cell sites across the U.S. – including ones in Miami just north of the airport – face an uncertain future. Demand for mobile data continues to rise, thanks to widespread adoption of bandwidth-heavy applications like streaming video as well as the continued expansion of services like fixed wireless access (FWA). For airports specifically, a growing number of traveler and employee applications are going wireless, from ticketing to maintenance to security monitoring and analytics.

Further, emerging AI services are expected to accelerate traffic growth, particularly in the uplink (upload) direction. These AI workflows – such as smart glasses live-streaming users’ activities for real-time analysis – could require a fundamental shift in network architecture.

Such changes are forcing network operators to continuously try to predict how and where user consumption patterns will shift, so they can dimension their networks for the busiest hour of the busiest day across thousands of shifting cell sites. Daily traffic load measurement – such as the load on cell sites north of the Miami airport – is one way to do just that.

To meet this unrelenting demand, network operators can deploy several technical strategies to mitigate traffic increases and boost capacity. Some of the most common techniques involve increasing the network’s overall capacity through the deployment of additional spectrum, particularly the mid-band frequencies that offer a balance of coverage and speed. However, this option might not be available near the Miami airport, particularly considering concerns surrounding mid-band spectrum frequencies and aircraft altimeters.

Operators can also rely on densification, which involves building additional cell sites, including small cells, to reduce the geographic area each tower must cover. But this too might be a challenge in Miami, given the rising cost of real estate.

Finally operators can leverage more efficient cellular technologies such as Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO), carrier aggregation, and standalone (SA) 5G to maximize spectral efficiency. And future technologies, including higher orders of MIMO, may further make networks more efficient. Such advanced technologies are clearly gaining steam nationwide, according to recent RootMetrics findings.

Looking ahead, 6G is positioned as the next significant evolution of cellular technology that promises to make wireless communications even more efficient and, in theory, ease the strain on cell towers in general. Already early 6G standards are under development.

While this next wave of 6G is expected to deliver improved capacity, network operators in Miami and elsewhere must still manage their current traffic loads on a day-in and day-out basis. Including in locations just north of the airport.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 29, 2026

Cache Optimization Strategies for Telecom Operators to Improve Video Streaming Experience

Analyzing the impact of local caching on YouTube video streaming performance in the Middle East

Video streaming is one of the most popular services globally, driving a large share of internet traffic. Global content providers efficiently distribute assets via caching architectures, while operators aim to localize traffic paths to optimize user experience and mitigate international transit costs. We use Ookla® Consumer QoE™ data to analyze the level of in-country video content caching in select countries in the Middle East (Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E.) and assess how it impacts streaming quality metrics.

Key takeaways:

  • Video start time performance in the benchmarked countries is very good overall. Ookla data from February 2026 shows that the selected countries had short video start times ranging from 1.45s in Kuwait to 1.69s in Qatar; that means that the delay between the viewer clicking to play and the first frame appearing was minimal. These values confirm a strong YouTube video streaming experience for most users.
  • Local caching ratios are high but vary significantly between operators. While countries like Kuwait and the U.A.E. have in-country caching ratios (the proportion of video tests that use local cache over the total number of tests) above 94%, Jordan and Saudi Arabia rely more on out-of-country caching. Since the in-country caching ratio is generally high, operators should focus on resolving local network issues before exploring external ones.
  • Video streaming indicators sharply degrade when content is sourced internationally. Routing traffic to international nodes generally incurs a latency penalty on video KPIs, causing increased delays, with out-of-country video start time and rebuffering time (a component of start time representing the delay to load data before the first frame appears) significantly higher than the local cache. The penalty can range from less than 0.5 seconds to more than six seconds, like in Qatar.
  • Operators can maximize cache efficiency. Operators should analyze in-country traffic to identify and address bottlenecks, and coordinate with market peers to install dedicated cache nodes to reduce reliance on expensive international transit links.

Video streaming, particularly YouTube, is the main driver of internet traffic globally

Live or on-demand video streaming accounts for a large share of current internet traffic due to its high bandwidth requirements, the growing number of users, the popularity of short-form videos, and social media platform proliferation. According to AppLogic Networks’ report, YouTube was responsible for 10% of global internet traffic in 2025, while TikTok contributed 5-7%.

Video-on-demand has also been a major driver of broadband adoption and revenue growth for both telecom operators and content platform providers. The global video streaming market was valued at US$156.86 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow to reach US$692.68 billion by 2033. Video is also increasingly used for marketing and branding. The digital video advertising market is forecast to increase by US$636.3 billion between 2024 and 2029, driven by the increasing popularity of in-app advertising and increased spending on online video advertising. 

The surge in demand, volume, and quality of streamed content places significant pressure on operators’ networks and content providers, and increases delivery costs, specifically for content delivery network (CDN) bandwidth, network upgrades, and maintenance. If content providers cannot address this adequately, it will inflame the ‘fair use’ debate, pressuring streaming companies and large traffic generators to contribute a share of the transport cost.

Shortening the traffic path is beneficial for operators, content providers, and consumers

Global content caches serve popular content repeatedly to multiple concurrent users, reducing traffic demand and eliminating upstream traffic to the content’s origin. Caching also reduces the cost of international bandwidth or IP transit when content originates abroad. Local caches allow operators to serve higher definition video to end users, as traffic is localized and less likely to be congested. For content providers, it also means they need less bandwidth to serve more users and improve customer retention. And for users, it can result in a better, faster experience.

A good example is Google Global Cache (GGC). This distributed caching architecture is located at ISPs and edge points, forming part of Google’s infrastructure that serves YouTube videos. Popular content gets temporarily cached on GCC nodes so that when a user requests a video, the request is routed via Domain Name System (DNS) and IP routing mechanisms to the nearest (or most optimal) GCC node based on the user’s location and ISP. Google also deploys other technologies, such as adaptive streaming and load balancing, to reduce buffering and latency. 

If the content is not cached, then it’s retrieved from edge Points of Presence (PoPs) at interconnection facilities (Google has over 100 interconnection facilities globally), which are connected to Google’s various data centres located in the Americas, Europe, and Asia. Other global streaming video service providers, such as Netflix, have similar caching architectures to efficiently distribute their content globally.

Illustration of How Google Delivers its Services (including YouTube) to Users

Disparities in local content caching across Middle Eastern nations highlight the potential to optimize end-user experience.

According to Ookla’s aggregated Consumer QoE™ data from February 2026, the Middle Eastern countries in this analysis demonstrated fast video start times (the duration a user waits for playback to begin). Results generally indicate a high-quality YouTube streaming experience with average times spanning from 1.45s in Kuwait to 1.69s in Qatar. Nevertheless, these national averages hide notable variations among individual operators, which stem from differences in traffic routing strategies and the effectiveness of local caching.

Median Video Streaming Start Times, per Country
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Median Video Streaming Start Times, per Country

We determine if an in-country cache was used by analyzing video server IP addresses from the Consumer QoE data. Our data shows that the U.A.E., Kuwait, and Bahrain have the highest in-country caching ratios, all recording values above 90%. Conversely, Jordan and Saudi Arabia exhibit a higher out-of-country caching proportion of 18.1% and 28.4%, respectively.

Distribution of In-Country vs. Outside-Country Video Streaming Tests, per Country
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Distribution of In-Country vs. Outside-Country Video Streaming Tests, per Country

When traffic is routed outside the country, it incurs a latency penalty on video start times, resulting in longer buffering times. In Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, the out-of-country video start time is between 25% and 87% higher than for in-country traffic; the difference rises to around 140% in Bahrain and the U.A.E.

Qatar showed significantly more severe video delays, representing the largest latency penalty observed. Video start time and rebuffering time were 5.5x and nearly seven times higher, respectively, compared to when local cache was used. This is due to the use of Google’s servers in Ireland and the U.S. when requested content is not readily available or local cache servers are saturated. The low proportion of video requests from international CDNs (11.5%) translates into a modest but notable impact on video streaming KPIs for Qatar.

There are also significant differences when comparing video delays associated with in-country CDNs. Given that most markets maintain a high in-country caching ratio, operators should prioritize the investigation of performance bottlenecks within their own and their peers’ local CDN networks before addressing out-of-country issues.

Median Initial Buffering Duration and Video Start Time, per Traffic Route, per Country
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Median Initial Buffering Duration and Video Start Time, per Traffic Route, per Country

On-peak load in Saudi Arabia forces the delegation of video traffic to international CDNs 

We analyzed our Saudi Arabian video streaming data to determine why its local caching ratio of 71.6% is lower than that of its neighbors. Our data highlights a significant disparity among providers, with one operator relying more heavily on international caches than its peers. Specifically, 44.0% of Operator A’s YouTube traffic was served from out-of-country servers, whereas other operators maintained this figure at just over 6%. This could be a result of one or a few cache servers hosted by Operator A being forced to offload their traffic to Google servers outside the country due to capacity constraints.

Distribution of In-Country vs. Outside-Country Video Streaming Tests, per Operator, Saudi Arabia
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Distribution of In-Country vs. Outside-Country Video Streaming Tests, per Operator, Saudi Arabia

Operator A had a large share of video cache requests exiting the country (44.0%), but a relatively low penalty of 0.5s compared to the other two. This suggests Operator A has excellent IP transit links or a closer proximity to international PoPs. However, the wider performance gap between in-country and out-of-country cache for Operators B and C suggests these providers face a greater performance challenge when traffic is forced international, despite their superior overall caching ratios (just over six percent).

Median Initial Buffering Duration and Median Start Times, per Traffic Route, per Operator, Saudi Arabia
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Median Initial Buffering Duration and Median Start Times, per Traffic Route, per Operator, Saudi Arabia

Consumer QoE data allows us to identify daily traffic patterns that lead to an increase in internationally routed traffic. For the three operators, we notice four distinct video traffic peaks in demand: at 5 AM, 12 PM, 3 PM, and 5 PM, aggregated over February. This shows that at these times, more users stream YouTube videos, creating demand for Google’s CDNs, and leading some users to be directed towards international CDNs. 

However, Operator A’s traffic pattern suggests a much higher level of video traffic offload to servers outside the country than the other two operators, and this trend has been persistent. This shows that while local servers can handle video traffic during off-peak hours, they struggle to handle the on-peak load, especially later in the day (at 3 PM and 5 PM). To address the high volume of internationally routed traffic, Operator A could upgrade the capacity and connectivity speeds of its local cache servers, expand their footprint, and improve their geographical distribution.

Video Test Traffic per Time of the Day, Destination, and Operator, Saudi Arabia
Source: Consumer QoE® | February 2026
Video Test Traffic per Time of the Day, Destination, and Operator, Saudi Arabia

Reducing international traffic and maximizing cache efficiency

Ookla’s data shows Middle East operators excel in video streaming KPIs, but opportunities remain to integrate deeper, local caching solutions and optimize national caching servers. These strategies offer clear benefits: content providers serve higher quality videos, operators realize lower infrastructure costs and improved customer retention, and end users enjoy high-resolution, lag-free videos. In short, optimizing traffic routes ensures the profitable use of network infrastructure as video demand continues to grow.

Please contact us for more details on how tools such as Consumer QoE can help provide actionable insights into network performance and resilience.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 7, 2026

Winning the Connectivity Game During the 2025 AFCON in Morocco

 The 35th edition of the Africa Cup of Nations tournament (AFCON), which ended on 18 January 2026, was the most attended and most scored edition in history, with over one million in-stadium spectators. The tournament coincided with the launch of 5G in the country and will serve as a testing ground in preparation for the FIFA World Cup™ 2030. This article examines mobile performance in selected stadiums during the competition and discusses users’ experiences with popular online activities, such as web browsing and video streaming.

Takeaways:

  • Al-Medina Stadium offered the highest download speed, whereas Rabat Olympic Stadium offered the highest upload speed. All reviewed stadiums offered very high throughput, with median download speeds ranging from 96 Mbps at Moulay El Hassan Stadium to 236 Mbps at Al-Medina Stadium. inwi was the speed leader in most venues, recording the fastest median download speeds in three out of five stadiums, peaking at 461.7 Mbps at Al-Medina Stadium, while Maroc Telecom dominated at Moulay El Hassan Stadium.
  • Mohammed V Stadium had the densest radio coverage in 4G and 5G, likely due to its urban location. On the other hand, Rabat Olympic Stadium had poor 4G and 5G signals. inwi frequently exhibited the highest 4G and 5G signal strength, while Orange often displayed lower RSRP readings. 
  • The web browsing experience was generally very good across venues, but notable differences existed between operators. inwi had the shortest web page loading time in four of the five stadiums, except at Moulay El Hassan, where Maroc Telecom had a slight advantage. Orange was consistently the least responsive operator for web traffic. 
  • Maroc Telecom was better performing at Moulay El Hassan Stadium than the other two operators. The incumbent operator delivered nearly double the download speed of inwi (161.25 Mbps vs. 79 Mbps), albeit lower than other stadiums, with a more balanced real-time communication experience. By contrast, inwi recorded its worst WhatsApp latency (81.25 ms), and Orange saw a large spike in video conferencing latency (194 ms).
  • All operators offered an excellent video streaming experience with a sub-2-second start time. inwi consistently delivered the fastest video start times in all five stadiums (ranging from 1267 ms to 1422 ms), ensuring the smoothest playback experience for fans watching replays or highlights.

Morocco’s mobile infrastructure handled the influx of supporters well during the 2025 African Cup

Morocco has been preparing for years for the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON). The government committed around USD 16.6 billion towards infrastructure projects up to 2030, when Morocco will host the World Cup, with the AFCON preparation framed as the first major phase of this effort. These funds have been allocated specifically for football, airport, road, and rail infrastructure upgrades. 

In this context, the telecom regulator and operators accelerated their collaboration and investments, such as the upgrading of existing 4G and fiber backhaul and infrastructure sharing between the integrated operators Maroc Telecom and inwi, which culminated in the launch of 5G in November 2025. The government also integrated AFCON and the 2030 World Cup into the national high‑speed internet strategy (Digital Morocco 2030), with a 5G coverage population target of 25% by 2026 and 70% by 2030, with priority for AFCON and World Cup cities and venues. 

In a previous article, we found that the cities of Rabat and Casablanca were leading the country in terms of median fixed broadband download speed, according to Speedtest Intelligence® data, thanks to growing fiber coverage. We also found that luxury hotels in Agadir and Marrakesh offer some of the fastest Wi-Fi networks in the country, meeting the needs of the most exigent of guests and football fans during their stay.

The tournament featured 24 teams that played 52 fiercely fought matches, and was the highest-scoring in history, with 121 goals. AFCON 2025 also set a record for the highest number of fans, with over one million in-stadium spectators. Mobile networks have been put to the test to concurrently serve so many fans and serve as a testing ground for the preparation of the World Cup. For these reasons, it is interesting to benchmark network coverage and QoS parameters between different stadiums and assess the impact they might have had on spectators’ online experience, be it in terms of web browsing or video streaming.

The rest of the article details an analysis of five stadiums across three cities, out of the nine stadiums in six cities, focusing on the venues that hosted the most critical matches (e.g., quarter-final to final). We used Speedtest Intelligence® to examine download and upload speeds as well as network signal strength within the stadiums for both operators combined. We also used Consumer QoE™ data with the same criteria to determine web page load time and video streaming start time to reflect the quality of supporters’ experiences, whether posting a picture or a message on Facebook or streaming video clips.

Stadiums Analyzed with Speedtest Intelligence® and Consumer QoE™ During the 2025 AFCON in Morocco

Network performance was generally very good throughout the 2025 AFCON, but a significant disparity exists between stadiums

Speedtest Intelligence data shows a high level of disparity between stadiums, as well as between operators across different locations. For example, Al-Medina (Al Barid) Stadium registered the highest performance among the sites analyzed, with a median download speed of 236 Mbps, while performance remains very high at Rabat Olympic Stadium (197 Mbps). On the other hand, the speeds were notably lower at Mohammed V, Prince Moulay Abdellah, and Moulay El Hassan Stadiums.

inwi consistently delivered the fastest median download speeds across all analyzed stadiums, often outperforming competitors by a wide margin. For example, its highest median speed reached 461.7 Mbps at Al-Medina Stadium, followed by 377.9 Mbps at Rabat Olympic Stadium. Maroc Telecom secured its only lead at Moulay El Hassan Stadium with a median download speed of 161.25 Mbps.

The leading stadiums in terms of median download speed also excelled in upload, though the differences between the stadiums are less pronounced. Al-Medina Stadium and Rabat Olympic Stadium maintain the lead with median upload speeds above 50 Mbps, with inwi delivering 68.06 Mbps and 60.0 Mbps, respectively. These two venues show the most competitive environment with high speeds across the board, with a narrow gap between the operators. 

Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium had the lowest aggregate upload speed at 20 Mbps, while Moulay Al Hassan Stadium offers slightly better performance, with Maroc Telecom taking the top spot with 42.30 Mbps, followed by Orange (32.51 Mbps), and inwi falling to last place with 26.00 Mbps. At Mohammed V Stadium, Inwi maintained the lead with 44.60 Mbps, Maroc Telecom followed at 32.00 Mbps, and Orange trailed slightly at 28.00 Mbps.

Download and Upload Speeds Achieved at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco
Speedtest Intelligence® | 21 December 2025 – 18 January 2026
Download and Upload Speeds Achieved at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco

Mohammed V Stadium had the best 4G and 5G coverage during the tournament 

In terms of network coverage measured using Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP), Mohammed V Stadium had the strongest aggregate 4G signal (-78.24 dBm), followed closely by Prince Moulay Abdellah (-78.68 dBm). For the latter venue, the three operators show good availability, particularly inside the stadium grounds. However, the 5G coverage is more limited in the surrounding areas.

Mohammed V Stadium also led in 5G signal strength (-71.06 dBm), where inwi had the highest 5G signal strength at -65.23 dBm, significantly stronger than the other two operators. Orange also provided a very strong 5G signal at Al-Medina Stadium (-71.96 dBm), outperforming both competitors.

Despite a strong signal at Mohammed V Stadium, the quality was relatively poor—the Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) was lower than -11 dB. This suggests that users likely experienced network degradation linked to interference in the stands rather than a lack of coverage. On the other hand, Rabat Olympic Stadium showed the weakest aggregate signal for both 4G (-81.14 dBm) and 5G (-80.19 dBm). Specifically, inwi had the weakest 4G signal with -83.68 dBm.

4G RSRP and 5G SS-RSRP at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco
Speedtest Intelligence® | 21 December 2025 – 18 January 2026
4G RSRP and 5G SS-RSRP at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco

Web browsing was generally good across venues, albeit Orange consistently showed the slowest page load times

We used Consumer QoE data to explore web page load time. These measurements reflect consumers’ real-world experiences of using the internet, like accessing social media sites and searching for information online. Accessing these services with little or no delay means less customer frustration and increased satisfaction.

The data shows that users experienced very quick webpage load times in all surveyed stadiums, with median load times ranging from 1477 ms to as low as 1374 ms. Fans in Al-Medina Stadium (1374 ms) and Rabat Olympic Stadium (1377 ms) enjoyed faster webpage load times than those in other venues. Moulay Abdellah Stadium has the slowest aggregate load time, though the difference across all stadiums is relatively small (<100ms).

However, there are significantly larger differences between operators. Inwi provided the fastest page load times in 4 out of 5 stadiums, with its best performance at Mohammed V (1284 ms) and Al-Medina (1286 ms), while Maroc Telecom took the lead at Moulay El Hassan (1378 ms). On the other hand, Orange consistently underperformed with the highest page load time across all five stadiums, peaking at 1846 ms at Al-Medina.

Web Page Load Time at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco
Speedtest Intelligence® | 21 December 2025 – 18 January 2026
Web Page Load Time at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco

Al-Medina Stadium led in fast messaging performance; Mohammed V Stadium excelled in video calling

Messaging and video conferencing apps have become a staple of modern life and an essential part of a football fan’s experience at the stadium, as they allow the sharing of messages, images, and videos. The lower the latency on the services, the faster the delivery of content and the smoother the video interaction. 

Al-Medina Stadium offered the snappiest text messaging experience with an aggregate latency of just 36.9 ms. At the end of the spectrum, Mohammed V Stadium showed the highest aggregate latency at 54 ms. The other three stadiums (Moulay El Hassan, Prince Moulay Abdellah, and Rabat Olympic) hover between 46 ms and 48 ms, indicating a generally consistent experience across the capital’s venues. 

inwi recorded the lowest WhatsApp latency at Rabat Olympic (33.05 ms) and leads at Al-Medina (34.2 ms) and Mohammed V (41.4 ms) Stadiums. However, it suffered a massive performance drop at Moulay El Hassan Stadium, recording the worst score of any operator (81.25 ms). In contrast, Orange took the top spot at Moulay El Hassan (36 ms) and Prince Moulay Abdellah (41 ms). Generally, Maroc Telecom trails the competition in this metric, recording the highest latency in three out of five stadiums, with a notable lag at Rabat Olympic (72.2 ms). 

Mohammed V Stadium, which suffered from a relatively slow response for text messaging, had the best aggregate latency for video calls, with a low value of 74 ms. On the other hand, Moulay El Hassan (110.7 ms) and Al-Medina (101.6 ms) Stadiums have latencies exceeding 100 ms, which may introduce noticeable lag during video calls.

inwi was the consistent overperformer for video conferencing, offering the lowest latency in 4 out of 5 stadiums. Its performance was the best at Al-Medina (61.8 ms), where it was more than twice as responsive as Maroc Telecom (147.2 ms). However, the latter managed to take the top spot at Moulay El Hassan (80.2 ms). Orange generally performed well, except at Moulay El Hassan Stadium, where it recorded a severe latency spike (194 ms).

WhatsApp and Video Conferencing Latencies at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco
Speedtest Intelligence® | 21 December 2025 – 18 January 2026
WhatsApp and Video Conferencing Latencies at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco

Maroc Telecom and Orange consistently trailed inwi in video streaming across all stadiums

We also used QoE data to explore video streaming start time and initial buffering time. The interval between a user clicking “Play” and the first frame appearing is critical, as research indicates that users begin to lose patience after just 2 seconds and risk abandonment, and more so for a live stream of a sporting event. Mid-stream buffering can also be frustrating to the users. 

The data shows that YouTube start times remained low at around 1,400–1,500 ms, which indicated robust video streaming performance, but these aggregate values hide stark differences between the operators. Al-Medina Stadium took the lead in terms of video streaming start time (1,397 ms), followed by Mohammed V Stadium with 1,468 ms. As with the other metrics, inwi was the undisputed leader in video streaming, recording the fastest video start times in all five stadiums, with the best performance at Moulay El Hassan (1267 ms) and Al-Medina (1281 ms). Maroc Telecom and Orange had start times between 1440 ms and 1660 ms, consistently trailing Inwi by approximately 200 ms to 400 ms across venues.

Video Streaming Start Time at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco
Speedtest Intelligence® | 21 December 2025 – 18 January 2026
Video Streaming Start Time at Select Stadiums During the 2025 AFCON, Morocco

Building on the success of AFCON to prepare for the World Cup in 2030

The 35th Africa Cup of Nations in Morocco served as a successful stress test for the country’s mobile infrastructure. The five analyzed stadiums offered exceptionally high speeds, with Al-Medina Stadium leading in median download speed (236 Mbps) and Rabat Olympic Stadium excelling in upload speed. inwi emerged as the overall speed leader in most venues, consistently recording the fastest median download speeds and delivering the lowest video streaming start times. Maroc Telecom held a strong position in certain venues and experienced better performance in real-time communication at Moulay El Hassan Stadium. Web browsing and video streaming experiences were also consistently excellent across all venues and operators, with video start times under 2 seconds. That said, the great disparity between stadiums and the lower speeds and coverage in some venues present clear targets for optimization. Overall, the great performance at AFCON highlights Morocco’s readiness to deliver high-quality connectivity, setting a strong foundation for the upcoming FIFA World Cup™ 2030. 

To find out how Ookla’s crowdsourced data and analytical tools can help you track network performance during major sporting events, contact us.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 20, 2026

Discover Speedtest Certified™: On-Site Verified Network Excellence

We have all experienced the same universal moment of frustration: You check into a hotel, prepare for an important video call, and suddenly the connection drops. You are forced to go off-camera just to keep the audio from breaking up.

This scenario represents a massive friction point in the modern economy. Whether it is a Fortune 500 company selecting a venue for a sales kickoff, a family booking a vacation, or a commercial tenant signing a ten-year lease, they are all essentially gambling on connectivity. While connectivity has become a fundamental utility, the market lacks a reliable way to verify it before signing the contract or checking in. This creates an industry-wide risk to brand reputation and revenue—but it also reveals a powerful opportunity for properties and technology partners to verifiably prove they stand apart from the competition.

While multiple programs share the goal of elevating digital excellence, they each serve fundamentally different strategic purposes. Understanding this distinction is essential for the C-suite and IT Director audience to choose the certification model that best aligns with their goals—whether that is promoting a smart building’s infrastructure or guaranteeing a network’s superior user experience.

What makes Speedtest Certified unique?

Speedtest Certified is the definitive property network verification program built to solve the universal problem of unreliable, unpredictable connectivity. Here is how we deliver a competitive advantage:

Measured, data-driven assessments

While other certifications have made significant contributions to the industry by championing the importance of digital infrastructure, Speedtest Certified takes a different approach. We are all-in on verifying the user’s digital experience. As a part of Ookla—a global leader in connectivity intelligence trusted by mobile network operators, ISPs, regulators, and enterprises—network measurement and analysis is in our DNA. We believe that the true measure of a network is how it performs when a user actually connects to it. Speedtest Certified is engineered to validate the actual connected experience, moving beyond theoretical capacity to proven reality.

  • Focus on Real-World Performance: Rather than rely on infrastructure assessments and self-reported data, Ookla uses a multi-faceted methodology to deliver consistent and unbiased results focused on the end-user.
  • Comprehensive Methodology: Our rigorous on-site assessment combines professional-grade tools like the Ekahau Sidekick 2 for comprehensive RF analysis with Speedtest SDKs to measure real-world performance metrics, including download/upload speed, latency, and jitter. This process delivers objective data on what users truly experience.
Quote: We see tremendous value in Speedtest Certified. Historically, the industry has lacked a clear, data-driven definition of what constitutes a great on-site digital experience. Speedtest Certified creates that standard, removing ambiguity for property owners and giving users a trusted signal of quality they can count on.

World-renowned brand recognition and trust

The Speedtest® brand is known across industries, across the globe. While other certifications have built respectable names within the commercial real estate industry, there often still exists an “explanation tax”—you have to educate the end-user (the tenant, the guest, the fan) and the executive teams on what the certification means and why they should care. Speedtest Certified eliminates that friction entirely.

  • No Translation Required: When a prospective tenant tours an office or a guest checks into a hotel and sees the Speedtest Certified seal, the message is immediate and visceral. They don’t need a brochure to understand it. Consumers and people who care about connectivity know the Speedtest brand, use the app, and trust the data. This instant recognition transforms your network into a premium amenity that justifies higher ADRs, accelerates leasing velocity, and validates your positioning in a way that industry-specific certifications cannot.
  • Global Authority: Speedtest is not just an industry standard; it is a trusted part of the global digital experience. With over 11 million daily user-initiated tests and adoption by network operators in dozens of countries, it is the yardstick by which the world measures internet performance. We have taken this network analysis verification to the edge, transforming invisible network infrastructure into a visible, marketable asset that builds immediate consumer trust. Trusted by over 90% of the Fortune 500—we combine decades of expertise with continuous innovation to enable flawless wireless networks from initial planning through implementation and beyond.

Easy-to-understand digital portal: Translating technical data into business value

Network data is often complex, and different stakeholders need different insights. While infrastructure-focused certifications provide deep dives into physical readiness—essential for engineering teams during development—Speedtest Certified focuses on the operational reality of the network.

The Speedtest Certified Digital Platform is engineered to bridge the gap between technical metrics and business outcomes, ensuring both Engineering and Executive teams have the specific intelligence they need.

We synthesize thousands of technical measurements into a clear, marketable narrative. The portal presents a Total Weighted Score and Activity-Based Assessments that allow stakeholders to track performance at a glance. By contextualizing performance for specific user needs—such as “Excellent for Video Streaming” or “Great for Remote Work”—we empower leasing and sales teams to pitch specific, verified use cases to prospects rather than relying on abstract technical specs.

While blueprints tell you what should happen, our platform tells you what is happening. For the IT & Network Team, the portal assesses the network infrastructure and provides a roadmap for continuous optimization based on real-world conditions.

The bottom line is that we don’t just tell you if your building is ready for great connectivity… Speedtest Certified proves you are delivering it, using a brand the world already trusts and a platform that turns data into the assurance needed for internal teams, prospective guests, and tenants.

Speedtest Certified for technology partners

For technology partners—including MSPs, VARs, and systems integrators—Speedtest Certified offers a unique opportunity to differentiate your business by leveraging the global authority and trust associated with the Speedtest brand. By transforming complex network data into automated, recognized proof of performance, you can help IT leaders bridge the communication gap with non-technical stakeholders and clearly articulate the long-term value of their digital infrastructure.

This program empowers partners to provide a standardized benchmark of excellence across every deployment, utilizing professional-grade tools and rigorous validation conducted by trained, certified assessors. Whether validating a new installation or providing a clear roadmap for continuous optimization, becoming an authorized partner allows you to stand out as a leader in delivering superior user experiences.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 17, 2026

Ookla and Microsoft Partner to Launch Speedtest from the Windows Taskbar

Ookla and Microsoft announce an expanded partnership, establishing Speedtest® as the integrated network performance testing platform across Bing and Windows.

Microsoft and Ookla announced a major expansion of their strategic partnership. Powered by Ookla’s Speedtest Web SDK, the global standard for internet metrics will now be more closely integrated across Microsoft’s most popular platforms. This integration places trusted, accurate network diagnostics exactly where users already are—from Bing to the system tray.

This expanded partnership eliminates the friction of everyday network troubleshooting. Following a successful integration of Speedtest into Bing in late 2023, Speedtest by Ookla will now serve as the public internet speed testing platform of choice for Microsoft, easily launched from Windows 11. 

For Windows users, this means a network speed test is accessible directly from the taskbar. Users can soon simply right-click their network icon in the system tray or open their Wi-Fi and Cellular Quick Settings to launch a diagnostic check without needing to manually open a browser or run a secondary tool.

Historically, diagnosing a slow connection meant manually opening a browser, navigating to a testing site, and running a secondary tool. Now, by embedding the testing launchpad within the OS, Microsoft and Ookla are empowering users to understand their network performance seamlessly.

Users across the Microsoft ecosystem gain several key advantages from this expanded partnership:

  • Faster access from Windows: Launch a speed test from common Windows networking entry points without manually opening the browser and searching, raising visibility for those less familiar with speed tests. 
  • Frictionless Troubleshooting: Instantly diagnose connection speeds and latency natively within the OS or platform, empowering consumers and enterprise users to validate their internet performance without interrupting their workflow.
  • Trusted Global Infrastructure: Rely on Ookla’s established backend network to provide highly accurate, real-world throughput and latency metrics directly through Microsoft interfaces.

The integrated Speedtest experience is currently available to Windows Insiders in the Release Preview channel and is now rolling out broadly to all eligible Windows devices.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.

| April 21, 2026

Measuring the Direct-to-Device (D2D) Marketplace: 2026

The D2D industry, still in its infancy, is showing steady progress.

Just a few years ago, the idea that a smartphone could connect to a satellite seemed more science fiction than technological possibility. But now, such connections are not only possible, they’re popping up in a growing number of locations around the world.

This development has significant implications for cellular network providers, telecom regulators, cell tower operators and equipment vendors – not to mention mobile users themselves. After all, D2D technology ultimately promises to eliminate outdoor cellular dead zones globally.

However, D2D technology is still maturing. Most such connections can only transmit a few bytes of data. And the service is commercially available in just a handful of countries. Ookla® data helps to shine a light on this emerging market and its growth potential.

Key takeaways:

  • The number of global D2D connections recorded by Ookla increased roughly 24.5% between July 2025 and March 2026. This growth coincides with the launch of Starlink Mobile’s D2D services in a number of countries, including Chile, Ukraine, Peru, and the U.K. However, growth in those countries was offset by a decline in the number of connections in the U.S. and Canada in recent months. This may correspond to moves by T-Mobile (in the U.S.) and Rogers (in Canada) to begin charging some customers for D2D services, as well as other factors such as seasonal usage trends
  • The U.S. leads the world in D2D connections, accounting for 45.9% of all global D2D connections in March 2026. Other countries showing noteworthy numbers of D2D connections in March 2026 included Australia (18.1% of global D2D samples), Chile (10%) and Canada (9.8%) – all countries with significant chunks of rural territory. Starlink accounted for the vast majority of these D2D samples, though Skylo and Lynk Global also generated some samples globally.
  • A very small percentage of mobile users are connecting to D2D satellites in each of these countries. For example, during March 2026, 0.46% of Speedtest® users in the U.S. recorded a connection to a D2D satellite. In Chile, that figure was 1.26% (the highest). In Canada, it was 0.70%. In Japan, it was 0.11% (the lowest). This is noteworthy because it helps to define the scale and scope of the overall D2D marketplace.
  • RootMetrics® conducted drive testing on Starlink’s D2D service for T-Mobile in rural New York state in the second half of 2025. The tests involved sending and receiving texts on phones that were in a moving car – essentially putting extra stress on a service that’s intended to be used outdoors, in a stationary situation, with a clear view of the sky. Nonetheless, the tests showed a 60% success rate. The average amount of time it took to successfully send and then receive a text (across 143 successful tests) was 1 minute, 17 seconds.
  • In the U.S., most D2D signal strength measurements (using RSRP, or Reference Signal Received Power) fell between -108 and -126 dBm. That’s outside the -80 to -120 dBm range of traditional, terrestrial cellular network measurements. This is likely due to the remote nature of these D2D connections, which are generally unaffected by interference from other users. They’re often in outdoor environments that aren’t cluttered with lots of other cellular signals, or with the traffic of lots of other users.

Turning fiction into reality

D2D technology connects satellites directly to smartphones. This is an impressive technological feat, considering those satellites are hundreds of miles above the Earth, and often traveling thousands of miles an hour. Traditional cell towers, meanwhile, are usually just a few miles away from mobile users.

Apple, via Globalstar’s satellites and spectrum holdings, pioneered the D2D market. Every iPhone since the iPhone 14, introduced in 2022, can send and receive text messages through these satellites.

But Apple isn’t alone.

SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile, Skylo, and Lynk Global have all announced commercial D2D services in select countries around the world. Viasat and AST SpaceMobile are among the companies that have announced plans to launch D2D offerings in the future. And just this month, Amazon announced plans to acquire Globalstar in order to provide D2D services to mobile network operators globally as part of its Amazon Leo satellite internet venture.

Most such services today support text messaging and some light data services, but D2D network performance ought to improve as vendors deploy additional satellites and spectrum.

As with most new technologies, there are a variety of technological designs and commercial implementations in the D2D marketplace. Apple, for example, is relying on Globalstar’s satellites, spectrum holdings and regulatory approvals to offer messaging via satellite. Meanwhile, both Starlink and Lynk are currently using spectrum from their mobile operator partners for D2D (and thereby supporting D2D connections across most newer smartphones). Both companies are also moving to inject their own spectrum holdings into their D2D efforts. And Skylo is running its services over spectrum and satellites owned by its satellite operator partners.

Partly as a result, the technological standards for these types of services are still evolving. The 3GPP – the organization charged with setting most cellular standards – is in the process of fully integrating D2D technology into future 5G and 6G standards. And telecom regulators around the world are working to address the many issues surrounding emerging D2D services, from interference concerns to the effect D2D satellites might have on astronomy.

Ookla data helps to shine a light on progress in the D2D marketplace via data derived from Android smartphones that register with satellites from Starlink, Skylo, and Lynk. Here are the countries where Ookla has recorded such connections between July 2025 and March 2026:

D2D connections grow – but remain a small part of a big industry

Overall, the total number of D2D samples recorded globally by Ookla increased 24.5% between July 2025 and March 2026:

Ookla recorded D2D connections in Ukraine (2.52% of all samples in March 2026) due to Kyivstar’s November launch with Starlink there. However, those results are not included in any mapping information due to sensitivities around connectivity and the ongoing conflict in the country.

From July 2025 to March 2026, the U.S. accounted for the plurality of D2D samples. But other countries have begun to show growth in recent months.

D2D Sample Count Share by Country
July 2025 – March 2026

Broadly, these results track with the testing and launch of Starlink’s D2D services across a growing number of countries. And Starlink is promising more D2D growth in the months ahead: According to the company’s site, Starlink plans to launch D2D services in large parts of Africa as well as in countries ranging from Spain to Kazakhstan to Mongolia to Madagascar to Mexico.

Regardless, D2D in general is still just a tiny part of the overall, global cellular industry. The below results, broken out by country, show the percent of users who showed at least one D2D connection, on a monthly basis. This data is based on Speedtest users with Android smartphones that support D2D connections from Starlink, Skylo, or Lynk.

Unique Monthly D2D Users, by Country
July 2025 – March 2026

Broadly, these results are not necessarily a surprise. For example, GSMA Intelligence recently noted that terrestrial networks already cover 96% of the global population, and that D2D connections typically only work outside rather than indoors (where most smartphone usage occurs). “In practice, the majority of mobile users will not actively need D2D on a regular basis,” the firm wrote.

Further, the percentage of unique monthly D2D users showed a slight decline in recent months in the U.S. and Canada. This may be due to a variety of factors including season usage trends (people tend to travel less during the winter). Further, T-Mobile and Rogers (Starlink’s partners in the U.S. and Canada, respectively) began charging some customers for Starlink-powered D2D services after the end of an initial free trial period. Both operators now offer the service for no additional cost to customers who subscribe to their more expensive service plans, but charge roughly $10 per month to customers on less expensive plans. They also offer the service to customers from other carriers, for a fee.

In Ukraine, Kyivstar does not charge extra for Starlink Mobile. Neither does KDDI in Japan. In Peru, Entel offers 200 text messages through Starlink Mobile across a number of its service plans for no extra cost. In the U.K., Telefonica’s O2 is offering Starlink Mobile at no extra cost on its more expensive “Ultimate” plan, and for around $4 per month to other customers. In the U.S., Verizon is not charging extra for Skylo’s D2D text messaging services.

Tracking the growth of a new market

Like most telecom operators, D2D providers like Starlink and Skylo use Mobile Country Codes (MCC) and Mobile Network Codes (MNC) as unique numerical identifiers for their services. The MCC identifies the country (530 for New Zealand, for example), while the MNC identifies the specific carrier within that country. The International Telecommunication Union, an agency of the United Nations, is responsible for the global standardization of these identification codes.

These codes create a starting point for tracking the rollout of D2D services because Android phones record which MCCs and MNCs they access. However, additional filters must be applied to these MCC and MNC registrations in order to remove devices that may have only briefly connected to a D2D network operator while in the process of switching from a Wi-Fi network to a cellular network, for example.

Further, the D2D market is in a state of flux. For example, AST SpaceMobile has promised to join the industry via the launch of 45-60 satellites by the end of 2026. Most of those satellites will offer data speeds of up to 120 Mbps. It’s not yet clear how those capabilities will shape customers’ actual experiences, but AST SpaceMobile partners like AT&T are promising “a full suite of broadband connectivity: voice, data, and text.”

Similarly, Amazon Leo is promising to maintain Globalstar’s constellation for Apple while deploying its own D2D satellite constellation by 2028. “The Leo D2D system will offer substantially higher spectrum use and efficiency than legacy direct-to-cell systems, which translates into faster speeds and better performance for customers,” according to the company.

And Lynk, backed by satellite operator SES, announced a merger with Omnispace in late 2025 to combine its “cell-tower-in-space” technology with Omnispace’s extensive satellite spectrum holdings.

SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile, meanwhile, recently announced plans to launch a second generation of D2D satellites, a constellation that will be roughly double the size of its current D2D constellation. Those new V2 D2D satellites will support the spectrum SpaceX purchased from EchoStar, alongside improved antennas and other advancements that Starlink said will “enable full 5G cellular connectivity with a comparable experience to current terrestrial service.” However, the launch of Starlink’s V2 D2D satellite constellation is contingent on SpaceX’s bigger Starship rocket, which remains in testing

That said, a major driver in the D2D industry broadly is the falling cost of satellite launches, thanks in large part to SpaceX’s existing Falcon 9 rocket. One estimate indicates that the price of putting 1 kilogram into orbit has recently tumbled from $10,000 to around $3,300.

The real-world use cases of D2D

The takeaways in any analysis of the global D2D marketplace are distinctly local in nature, as visible in the early results from T-Mobile’s deployment of Starlink’s D2D service in the U.S.

For example, the gradual rollout of D2D is clearly visible in Ookla data for Peru, where Starlink Mobile launched D2D services with Entel in December:

This helps to show the reach of D2D services, particularly in light of the fact that most cellular networks only cover populated areas and not the vast tracks of wilderness common across the globe (and in Eastern Peru).

Another view of Starlink’s D2D service comes from Ookla’s RootMetrics®, which conducts rigorous drive tests of cellular networks in the U.S. and globally. RootMetrics’s drive testing data can often provide a more nuanced look at the performance of mobile networks when compared with crowdsourced data from Speedtest.

Using flagship Android smartphones, RootMetrics’ engineers in the U.S. conducted drive tests in northern New York state in the second half of 2025, testing that included efforts to send text messages through T-Mobile’s Starlink-powered D2D connections in locations where T-Mobile’s cellular service wasn’t available. The drive traveled in and out of T-Mobile’s coverage area in the region.

In all, RootMetrics’ kit tried 238 times to send text messages through Starlink’s D2D network (when connected to Starlink’s MNC) during this drive test. The phones successfully sent and received texts 143 times, or roughly 60% of the time.

The longest amount of time it took for the RootMetrics’ kit to successfully send and receive a D2D text was 5 minutes. The shortest amount of time was 1 second. The average amount of time it took to successfully send and then receive a text (across the 143 successfully completed tests) was 1 minute, 17 seconds.

Again, this test was conducted while RootMetrics’ engineers were driving, so the sending and receiving phones were in a moving car and were not stationary. Most D2D services are intended to be used outdoors, in a stationary situation, with a clear view of the sky.

But, taking a step back, it’s also important here to note that many of these New York locations do not have any kind of internet connectivity. Thus, D2D connections can be critical in the event of a flat tire, broken ankle, or something worse.

Finally, text messaging represents the start of the D2D industry, but certainly not the end. Already Starlink has opened its D2D service to light data connections from a handful of applications including X, WhatsApp, onX, and Google Maps. And Starlink, AST SpaceMobile, Amazon Leo, and others have promised speedier D2D data connections in the future.

A closer look at D2D network conditions

D2D connections stand as a remarkable technical achievement, considering satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) are roughly 60 times further away from users’ phones than a traditional, terrestrial cell tower that’s just a few miles away.

So it shouldn’t be a surprise that the “link budget” for a D2D connection is much different from a standard, terrestrial one.

A cellular “link budget” is the accounting of all the power gains and losses that a signal experiences in and between a transmitter (the cell tower) and a receiver (the phone). A link budget can be measured in a wide variety of ways, but for this exercise we’ll look at two basic measurements:

  • RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power): This measures the strength of a signal, in dBm (decibel-milliwatts). The closer the number is to zero, the stronger the signal. For standard terrestrial cellular networks, -80 dBm is very strong and -120 dBm is very weak.
  • RSSNR (Reference Signal-to-Noise Ratio): This measures the quality of a signal, in dB (decibel). It tells you how much the signal “stands out” from any background noise. Higher numbers mean a cleaner, faster connection. For terrestrial cellular networks, typical measurements range between -10dB on the lower end and +19 dB on the higher end.

Here is how Ookla’s D2D network measurements in the U.S. compare against typical terrestrial, cellular network measurements. These terrestrial measurements were taken on T-Mobile’s network in Los Angeles, a city with generally excellent cellular coverage. That’s due to a variety of factors including an abundance of cell towers, relatively flat topography and weather that’s friendly to a cellular signal (meaning, not a lot of rain).

Most U.S. D2D RSRP measurements fall in between -108 and -126 dBm. How can a seemingly weak −120 dBm signal sustain a functional D2D connection? It’s likely due to the remote nature of these connections. They’re often in outdoor environments that aren’t cluttered with lots of other cellular signals, or with the traffic of lots of other users.

Basically, these D2D signals represent “heroic” connections: They’re right on the edge of what physics allows. This is also why D2D connections today generally only support very slow-speed data services like text messaging. There’s no room in the “link budget” for anything heavier.

But D2D vendors plan to improve this situation. With more spectrum and more advanced satellites – carrying more powerful antennas that can tighten beams around smaller groups of users – they hope to eke out even better network performance from space.

What will a D2D future mean?

According to a February report from the Global mobile Suppliers Association (GSA), D2D services have been launched in 15 countries. And there are 61 countries and territories that are planning, evaluating, testing, or have already launched satellite-to-smartphone partnerships. Starlink leads in this respect with 59 partnerships, according to the GSA count, followed by AST SpaceMobile with 28 partnerships.

The GSA’s report doesn’t cover China. There, according to ABI, China Unicom and China Telecom are already licensed to offer D2D services via the state-owned Tiantong GEO satellite system. Meanwhile, China Mobile uses the BeiDou navigation satellite system, and plans to integrate with emerging satellite constellations to further expand its D2D capabilities. To scale these capabilities beyond emergency voice and text to full mobile broadband, all three state-backed telcos are coordinating with the government to integrate with China’s rapidly deploying LEO mega-constellations, most notably Project Guowang and G60 Qianfan (Spacesail).

The reach of D2D technology has significant implications for cellular network operators, particularly those looking to understand the movement of customers who leave their operator’s network footprint. For example, a large number of customers traveling into rural locations could spur a network operator to consider the installation of a cell tower to better cover those customers.

On the other hand, the widespread availability of satellite-powered “broadband connectivity,” as AT&T has promised, could ease demand for additional cell towers in rural areas. This could affect the long-term business for cell tower operators. Already Starlink is promising that its V2 constellation for D2D services will allow mobile network operators to “invest less in terrestrial networks while unlocking seamless service in remote areas.” The real calculation might ultimately be economic: Is it less expensive to construct a cell tower or to rely on a D2D provider to cover rural, outdoor areas?

As for regulators, the broad adoption of D2D services could affect a variety of policies, including financial incentives for telecom services in rural areas. For example, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the U.S. is still evaluating the 5G Fund for Rural America, an initiative that aims to distribute up to $9 billion over the next decade to bring high-speed 5G to rural areas. Should D2D services factor into that spending?

Regardless, D2D likely won’t impact indoor coverage efforts, considering satellite-borne signals generally can’t penetrate buildings and other structures. This is important considering an estimated 80% of mobile data is consumed indoors.

For mobile users – those in outdoor, rural areas – such details may not matter. The growing availability of D2D could lead to the elimination of outdoor cellular dead zones, ensuring smartphone connectivity virtually anywhere on the globe.

Ookla retains ownership of this article including all of the intellectual property rights, data, content graphs and analysis. This article may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed or published for any commercial purpose without prior consent. Members of the press and others using the findings in this article for non-commercial purposes are welcome to publicly share and link to report information with attribution to Ookla.