When your favorite app, streaming platform, or internet provider goes down, you need answers fast. That’s why we are excited to introduce a modern refresh to the Downdetector web experience, designed to bring new features and significantly upgrade your user experience. This redesign brings Downdetector into a new era, creating a flexible, accessible framework that paves the way for more future enhancements.
What’s New in the Downdetector Refresh
We’ve rebuilt the Downdetector web experience to give you more clarity and control when troubleshooting your digital world. Here are some key features to look out for:
Enhanced UI: Enjoy a sleek, modernized interface with improved accessibility across both mobile and desktop platforms. Navigating outage data is now even smoother and more intuitive, no matter what device you are using.
Improved Service Indicators: Get the answers you need at a glance. We’ve updated our service indicators to provide clearer, immediate visual cues of which services are actively experiencing problems.
Enhanced Search with Trending Services: Find what you’re looking for instantly. Our upgraded search feature now highlights trending services so you can jump straight to platforms experiencing active outages.
Light and Dark Mode Support: You can now easily toggle between Light Mode and Dark Mode to match your system preferences and reduce eye strain during those late-night service disruptions.
Multi-Language Support: To better serve our global community, the new web experience is tailored to your location. Depending on your region, the site now supports the primary local languages, in addition to English.
Now Available Globally
The rollout is complete! The refreshed Downdetector web experience is now live across all 67 countries we serve. You can explore the newly upgraded design in the following locations:
The Americas: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, Perú, Puerto Rico, and the USA.
Europe: Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, and the UK.
Middle East & Africa: Algeria, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa, Tunisia, and the UAE.
Asia-Pacific: Australia, Bangladesh, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam.
Visit Downdetector today to check out the new look and monitor outages in your region!
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.
Ookla® is a global leader in connectivity intelligence that provides consumers, businesses, and other organizations with data-driven insights to improve networks and connected experiences.
Fiber internet continues to raise the bar for speeds and reliability across the United States, and GFiber is leading this effort through their commitment to delivering the best internet service. This leadership is built on a foundation of significant, ongoing investment in GFiber’s 25G PON fiber optic network, which delivers the next-gen capacity and low latency required for today’s and tomorrow’s bandwidth-intensive applications. GFiber offers a full range of symmetrical multi-gig plans today, with speeds up to 20 Gbps in early deployment. While driving innovation in network speeds, GFiber also aggressively targets superior Quality of Experience (QoE) by optimizing the performance of customer Wi-Fi inside the home. This focus supports GFiber’s mission of providing consistent, high-performance connectivity to every customer in every market, wrapped in a service experience that defies the norms.
This commitment is underpinned by a tech-forward strategy that prioritizes the aggressive deployment of best-in-class Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) and an exceptional, high-quality installation experience. These are the crucial factors that ensure the high-performance capabilities of the fiber network translate seamlessly to the Wi-Fi experience, where customers need it most.
Situation
The demand for internet speed and bandwidth in the modern home is increasing rapidly. This growth is driven by the high volume of connected devices and the emergence of bandwidth-intensive applications like AI, Virtual Reality (VR), and high-resolution live streaming/video. These use cases are creating a future that requires significantly higher network capacity and extremely low latency for a strong user experience.
As bandwidth-intensive applications and high-performance client devices became standard in the home, GFiber continued to aggressively manage the end-to-end quality of its service. Unwilling to compromise on the customer experience, GFiber identified that legacy routers could eventually become a limiting factor for these modern devices. While customer device choices (like phones, computers, etc.) also impact the experience, GFiber is continually investing in its core network and CPE to ensure the infrastructure is ready to deliver full performance the moment a customer upgrades to the latest equipment.
To stay ahead of this curve, GFiber leveraged data to pinpoint where older Wi-Fi technology might restrict performance. By proactively upgrading this CPE, GFiber ensured that its hardware strategy remained as forward-looking as its network infrastructure, maximizing the value of the connection for every customer.
Download the full case study
Check out our full case study to find out how GFiber adopted a data-driven approach to confirm customers were receiving the promised speeds across all their devices via Wi-Fi.
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.
Ookla® is a global leader in connectivity intelligence that provides consumers, businesses, and other organizations with data-driven insights to improve networks and connected experiences.
The 2026 World Cup is going to be massive. Forty-eight teams, 16 stadiums, and three host countries – the U.S., Canada, and México – all trying to cram a colossal number of fans, players, broadcasters, and mobile data into cities across the continent.
Beyond that, fans will undoubtedly want to use their phones to track their favorite team’s progress, upload selfies, download game highlights, and otherwise enjoy the event as modern fans do.
Thus, Ookla® data can provide network operators, equipment vendors, city managers, World Cup fans, and others a guide on what kind of connectivity to expect during the festivities. This analysis will consider the event from a Latin American perspective.
Key takeaways:
During this year’s World Cup 2026, fans in and around U.S. stadiums can generally expect faster median mobile download speeds than those at Canadian stadiums. Stadiums in México may trail those in both the U.S. and Canada. Mercedes-Benz Stadium, in Atlanta, stands out as providing the fastest mobile upload and download speeds during the second half of 2025.
In a survey of World Cup locations across México – one that looked at both stadiums as well as the areas where fans are expected to gather – Telcel’s mobile offerings generally provided speedier connections than those from AT&T and Altan Redes.
During the World Cup this summer, inbound and outbound mobile roaming services will be paramount for travelers. Customer experiences here can vary widely. For example, travelers with services from Claro in Brazil may receive much faster 5G speeds in the U.S. when compared with travelers sporting service from TIM or Vivo in Brazil. Similarly, travelers into México who roam onto Telcel’s network there ought to expect LTE connections – unless they bought mobile services from Telus in Canada, or they hail from Brazil or Guatemala and have services from Telcel’s parent company America Movil. In those cases, they’ll have a good chance of connecting to Telcel’s 5G network in México.
Argentina, Brazil, and México contributed to a spike of mobile roamers from Latin America into Qatar during the 2022 World Cup. Most such travelers used Wi-Fi where available, but those who connected to Vodafone’s mobile network generally received faster median download speeds than those who connected to Ooredoo’s network during the event four years ago. Local users didn’t see this difference.
Learnings from Qatar
Qatar hosted the World Cup four years ago, during November 2022, and the country’s event can serve as a guide for fans, network operators, and others preparing for this year’s contest. Importantly, the 2022 World Cup also allowed wireless network operators in the country to show off the performance of 5G, a largely new and untested technology at that time. The results were impressive: Median 5G download speeds reached 472.13 Mbps during the event, according to a review from Ookla in 2022.
Beyond this network performance study, Ookla data can also shine a light on the fans who traveled into Qatar to catch the games. Specifically, Saudi Arabia and the United States contributed the highest number of roamers into Qatar during the 2022 World Cup. These countries also contribute the most overall cellular roamers into Qatar on a yearly basis.
Since this is a Latin American-flavored analysis, it’s worth noting that Argentina, Brazil, and México contributed a spike of roamers from the region into Qatar during the 2022 World Cup, based on the network operators supplying those roamers’ SIM cards:
Not surprisingly, most Latin American roamers connected via Wi-Fi rather than cellular (4G LTE or 5G) when cheering their teams in Qatar. This finding tracks with recent Ookla studies into the behavior of roamers, and is likely due to fans’ desire to avoid cellular roaming fees. Another factor that could affect travelers’ connectivity: eSIM technology, which allows travelers to bypass their home operator’s roaming packages in favor of local or regional data plans that may be less expensive.
Latin American roamers into Qatar, by network technology
November 2022 – December 2022
Personal (Argentina) and Vivo (Brazil) shine by providing their customers with access to Qatar’s 5G connections. This is likely due to roaming partnerships between the mobile network operators in Qatar and those in Latin America.
And here is where such partnerships come into focus. Qatar visitors who roamed onto Vodafone’s network in the country experienced median download speeds almost twice as fast as those who connected to Ooredoo’s network – during the 2022 World Cup, local users didn’t see that kind of difference. This difference in roaming speeds may be due to network-usage limitations imposed by either local or roaming network operators.
Network performance for roamers into Qatar November 2022 – December 2022
Operator
Median download (Mbps)
Median upload (Mbps)
Share of roamers
Ooredoo
48.81
15.98
46%
Vodafone
122.78
21.75
54%
Analyzing the stadiums of 2026
This year’s World Cup will span 16 stadiums across three countries. And the connectivity differences among those venues are clear:
World Cup 2026 Stadium Mobile Network Performance
Speedtest Intelligence | Zip code-level measurements in 2025 | All providers
These findings – which show median mobile download speeds in Mexican stadiums trailing those from Canada and the U.S. – also track with the Speedtest Global Index® for countrywide mobile speeds among the U.S., Canada and México. Such results generally reflect both the availability of hearty mid-band spectrum allotments for 5G as well as operators’ general willingness to invest in the equipment necessary to put that spectrum into action.
However, stadium upload speeds don’t track directly along country lines – nor is there as much difference among the venues as there is with download speeds. This likely will come as a relief to World Cup fans keen on uploading their celebrations during games.
As for the venues specifically, Mercedes-Benz Stadium, in Atlanta, Georgia, is conspicuous as a speedy location for uplinks and downlinks, as well as a place for snappy, low-latency connections. The stadium opened less than a decade ago, in 2017, and therefore likely benefits from the latest in wireless networking technologies, as well as a substantial backhaul connection that can shuttle fans’ data out of the venue and onto the wider internet.
Wireless network operators typically invest into equipment dedicated to stadiums and other popular, high-traffic venues. High-capacity distributed antenna systems (DAS), temporary cell sites, or millimmeter-wave (mmWave) spectrum can be used to better support large, dense collections of users, like those expected to attend World Cup 2026 festivities. Indeed, these are some of the techniques Verizon employed to provide median download speeds of 1464.38 Mbps in January in preparation for February’s Super Bowl LX at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California.
Given that this is a Latin American analysis, let’s look at México in more detail. According to El Diario, the country expects 5.5 million World Cup fans to descend onto the country. World Cup activities there ought to stretch far beyond each of the country’s World Cup stadiums: Estadio Akron in Guadalajara, Estadio BBVA in Monterrey and Estadio Banorte in México City.
Thus, we’ll look at metrics across each of these large city areas. These areas – roughly 310 square miles around the stadiums – are the broad locations where visitors and fans are expected to stay and play during the World Cup.
In this assessment, Telcel – which has invested in its 5G network in México – excelled in providing speedy median mobile download connections. Telcel also plans to use network slicing technology to manage potential congestion amid an influx of traffic on its network during the World Cup.
Median mobile download speeds in Mexico's large city areas
2H 2025
Telefonica’s Movistar isn’t listed in the above charts because the company piggybacks on AT&T’s network in México – but Telefonica is responsible for handling its customers’ roaming experience abroad. Moreover, Telefonica officials have said they plan to use analytics and AI technology to monitor the company’s network for potential bottlenecks.
Finally, a closer look at México’s World Cup locations shows the differences among the country’s providers as well as the differences among their various networking technologies, from 5G to 4G LTE to 3G. The below charts measure page load time (in ms), which is the period required for a specific webpage to display on a user’s screen. This serves as a critical benchmark for internet quality as it directly impacts a user’s browsing experience (meaning, how fast they can check World Cup scores). Similarly, video start time is the duration between when a user hits play and when the first frame of their video actually appears (meaning, how fast they can watch World Cup highlights). This reflects their operator’s ability to serve up a responsive and stable connection.
Not surprisingly, 5G consistently delivers the fastest times for both page loading and video starting. Further, both Telcel and AT&T are standouts. This indicates that Telcel may offer more raw speed, but that AT&T’s network also provides speedy response times to users’ requests.
Roaming in 2026: Which network will host the data?
A final question for network operators and World Cup fans alike involves the networks their phones will connect to while abroad. This roaming question creates complex dynamics for both mobile users and network operators.
For users, they must ensure connectivity while dealing with the anxiety of unpredictable costs and varying network quality. Meanwhile, operators must navigate intricate roaming agreements that cover billing systems, settlements across currencies, and a wide range of network- and phone-related technical details.
These complexities are clear in a look at Telcel’s inbound roaming metrics. The below charts show the top 10 international wireless operators that connected to Telcel’s network in México in the second half of 2025, based on the number of international customers roaming into México observed in Ookla data. This data highlights not only the experiences these travelers may receive when they arrive in México for the World Cup later this year, but also the types of roaming agreements international operators may ink with Telcel’s parent America Movil.
These findings indicate that World Cup fans traveling into México and connecting to Telcel (the country’s biggest operator with roughly 70% of the mobile market) should expect to spend most of their time on the operator’s 4G LTE network. However, that network generally provides downloads between 50 Mbps and 70 Mbps, speeds that are suitable for activities like checking team scores and watching game highlights. Not surprisingly, Telcel’s 5G network delivers clear improvements over 4G LTE, but only a few of the operator’s roaming partners (such as Telus in Canada) show meaningful 5G usage. Considering America Movil also owns Claro in Brazil and Guatemala, it’s no surprise that customers from those countries also connect to America Movil’s 5G network in México.
A final calculation in a Latin American-themed roaming analysis involves the reverse of inbound roaming: outbound roaming. Here we’ll look at travelers from Brazil into the U.S.; based on the SIM card in those roamers’ phones, T-Mobile is the preferred operator for two of Brazil’s three big mobile network operators.
Roamers from Brazil into the U.S.
2H 2025
Then, after that connection was established, Brazilian roamers into the U.S. often relied on 5G. However, those roaming customers didn’t necessarily receive the speedy download connections often available through 5G. Customers with service from Brazil’s Claro did see a speed gain, but those from TIM and Vivo experienced more modest improvements. This may suggest differences in those operators’ devices, roaming agreements, or traffic prioritization.
Of course, the World Cup is still several months away, which will give operators more time to expand and improve their networks, as well as to deploy temporary equipment in select locations where there may be extra network traffic. Nonetheless, this report provides a baseline – a way to prepare – in anticipation of high-demand conditions.
Ookla will be monitoring performance during and after the World Cup matches – look for further analysis later this year. Also, don’t miss our March 26 webinar: World Cup 2026: Is Your Roaming Strategy Ready for High-Density Traffic? Get expert insights into roaming performance and network readiness for the 2026 World Cup host countries. Multiple sessions are available in English, Spanish, and Portuguese.
Preparando la Red para la Copa del Mundo 2026: perspectiva latinoamericana
La Copa del Mundo 2026 será enorme. Cuarenta y ocho equipos, 16 estadios y tres países anfitriones —EE. UU., Canadá y México— intentando albergar una cantidad colosal de aficionados, jugadores, emisoras y datos móviles en ciudades de todo el continente.
La conectividad durante el Mundial de este año será crucial. Las entradas para los partidos sólo se gestionarán a través de la aplicación oficial FIFA World Cup 2026™. Los correos electrónicos y las impresiones no funcionarán.
Además, los fans querrán usar sus teléfonos para seguir el progreso de sus equipos, subir selfies, descargar momentos destacados y disfrutar del evento como lo hacen los aficionados modernos.
Por ello, los datos de Ookla® pueden ofrecer a los operadores de red, proveedores de equipos, gestores municipales y aficionados una guía sobre qué tipo de conectividad esperar. Este análisis analiza el evento desde una perspectiva latinoamericana.
Conclusiones clave:
Durante la Copa del Mundo 2026 de este año, los aficionados en los estadios de EE.UU. y sus alrededores pueden esperar velocidades medianas de descarga móvil generalmente más rápidas que las de los estadios canadienses. Los estadios en México pueden quedar por detrás de los de EE.UU. y Canadá. El Mercedes-Benz Stadium, en Atlanta, destaca por haber ofrecido las velocidades de carga y descarga móvil más rápidas durante la segunda mitad de 2025.
En un análisis de las localizaciones de la Copa del Mundo en todo México —una que analizó tanto los estadios como las áreas donde se espera que se reúnan los aficionados— las ofertas móviles de Telcel ofrecieron conexiones generalmente más rápidas que las de AT&T y Altan Redes.
Durante la Copa del Mundo de este verano, los servicios de roaming móvil entrantes y salientes serán fundamentales para los viajeros. Las experiencias de los clientes aquí pueden variar ampliamente. Por ejemplo, los viajeros con servicios de Claro en Brasil pueden experimentar velocidades 5G mucho más rápidas en los EE.UU. en comparación con los viajeros que cuentan con el servicio de TIM o Vivo en Brasil. Del mismo modo, quienes viajen a México y utilicen el roaming en la red de Telcel deberían esperar conexiones LTE —a menos que hayan comprado servicios móviles de Telus en Canadá, o provengan de Brasil o Guatemala y tengan servicios de la empresa matriz de Telcel, América Móvil. En esos casos, tendrán una buena oportunidad de conectarse a la red 5G de Telcel en México.
Argentina, Brasil y México contribuyeron a un aumento de viajeros en roaming móvil desde América Latina hacia Qatar durante la Copa del Mundo 2022. La mayoría de esos viajeros utilizaron Wi-Fi donde estaba disponible, pero aquellos que se conectaron a la red móvil de Vodafone generalmente recibieron velocidades medias de descarga más rápidas que aquellos que se conectaron a la red de Ooredoo durante el evento hace cuatro años. Los usuarios locales no vieron esta diferencia.
Aprendizajes de Qatar
Qatar fue el anfitrión de la Copa del Mundo hace cuatro años, durante noviembre de 2022, y el evento del país puede servir como guía para los aficionados, operadores de red y otros que se preparan para la contienda de este año. Es importante destacar que la Copa del Mundo 2022 también permitió a los operadores de redes inalámbricas en el país presumir el rendimiento del 5G, una tecnología en gran medida nueva y no probada en ese momento. Los resultados fueron impresionantes: las velocidades medianas de descarga 5G alcanzaron los 472.13 Mbps durante el evento, según un análisis de Ookla en 2022.
Más allá de este estudio de rendimiento de red, los datos de Ookla también pueden arrojar luz sobre los aficionados que viajaron a Qatar para ver los juegos. Específicamente, Arabia Saudita y los Estados Unidos contribuyeron con el mayor número de viajeros en roaming hacia Qatar durante la Copa del Mundo 2022. Estos países también contribuyen con la mayor cantidad de viajeros en roaming celular total hacia Qatar anualmente.
Dado que este es un análisis con sabor latinoamericano, vale la pena señalar que Argentina, Brasil y México contribuyeron a un aumento de viajeros en roaming de la región hacia Qatar durante la Copa del Mundo 2022, de acuerdo con los operadores de red que suministraron las tarjetas SIM de esos viajeros:
No es de extrañar que la mayoría de los viajeros latinoamericanos en roaming se conectaran a través de Wi-Fi en lugar de celular (4G LTE o 5G) para animar a sus equipos en Qatar. Este hallazgo coincide con estudios recientes de Ookla sobre el comportamiento de los viajeros en roaming, y es probable que se deba al deseo de los aficionados de evitar las tarifas de roaming celular. Otro factor que podría afectar la conectividad de los viajeros: la tecnología eSIM, que permite a los viajeros omitir los paquetes de roaming de su operador local en favor de planes de datos locales o regionales que pueden ser menos costosos.
Latinoamericanos en itinerancia en Qatar, por tecnología de red
Noviembre 2022-Diciembre 2022
Personal (Argentina) y Vivo (Brasil) brillan al proporcionar a sus clientes acceso a las conexiones 5G de Qatar. Esto probablemente se deba a los acuerdos de roaming entre los operadores de redes móviles en Qatar y los de América Latina.
Y aquí es donde tales asociaciones entran en escena. Los visitantes de Qatar que utilizaron roaming en la red de Vodafone en el país experimentaron velocidades medias de descarga casi dos veces más rápidas que aquellos que se conectaron a la red de Ooredoo. Durante la Copa del Mundo 2022, los usuarios locales no vieron ese tipo de diferencia. Esta diferencia en las velocidades de itinerancia puede deberse a las limitaciones de uso de red impuestas por los operadores de red locales o de roaming.
Rendimiento de red para roamers en Qatar Noviembre 2022 – Diciembre 2022
Operador
Mediana bajada (Mbps)
Mediana subida (Mbps)
Porcentaje de roamers
Ooredoo
48.81
15.98
46%
Vodafone
122.78
21.75
54%
Analizando los estadios de 2026
La Copa del Mundo de este año abarcará 16 estadios en tres países. Y las diferencias de conectividad entre estas sedes son claras:
Rendimiento de red móvil de los estadios de la Copa del Mundo 2026
Speedtest Intelligence / Mediciones for código postal en 2025 / Todos los proveedores
Estos hallazgos —que muestran que las velocidades medianas de descarga móvil en los estadios mexicanos están por detrás de las de Canadá y EE.UU.— también coinciden con el Speedtest Global Index® para las velocidades móviles a nivel nacional entre EE.UU., Canadá y México. Tales resultados generalmente reflejan tanto la disponibilidad de asignaciones sustanciales de espectro de banda media para 5G como la disposición general de los operadores para invertir en el equipo necesario para poner ese espectro en acción.
Sin embargo, las velocidades de carga en los estadios no siguen directamente las líneas nacionales, ni existe tanta diferencia entre las sedes como ocurre con las velocidades de descarga. Es probable que esto represente un alivio para los aficionados de la Copa del Mundo interesados en subir sus celebraciones durante los partidos.
En cuanto a las sedes específicamente, el Mercedes-Benz Stadium, en Atlanta, Georgia, destaca como una ubicación rápida para enlaces de subida y bajada, así como un lugar para conexiones ágiles de baja latencia. El estadio se inauguró hace menos de una década, en 2017, y por lo tanto probablemente se beneficia de lo último en tecnologías de redes inalámbricas, así como de una conexión de backhaul sustancial que puede transportar los datos de los aficionados fuera del recinto hacia el internet en general.
Los operadores de redes inalámbricas suelen invertir en equipos dedicados a estadios y otros lugares populares de alto tráfico. Los sistemas de antenas distribuidas (DAS) de alta capacidad, los sitios celulares temporales o el espectro de ondas milimétricas (mmWave) pueden utilizarse para dar un mejor soporte a grandes y densas concentraciones de usuarios, como los que se espera que asistan a la Copa del Mundo 2026. De hecho, estas son algunas de las técnicas que Verizon empleó para proporcionar velocidades medianas de descarga de 1464,38 Mbps en enero, en preparación para la Super Bowl LX de febrero en el Levi’s Stadium en Santa Clara, California.
Dado que este es un análisis latinoamericano, analicemos México con más detalle. Según El Diario, el país espera la llegada de 5,5 millones de aficionados de la Copa del Mundo. Las actividades de la Copa del Mundo allí deberían extenderse mucho más allá de cada uno de los estadios mundialistas del país: el Estadio Akron en Guadalajara, el Estadio BBVA en Monterrey y el Estadio Banorte en la Ciudad de México.
Por lo tanto, analicemos las métricas en cada una de estas grandes áreas urbanas. Estas áreas —de aproximadamente 310 millas cuadradas alrededor de los estadios— son las ubicaciones amplias donde se espera que los visitantes y aficionados se hospeden y se diviertan durante la Copa del Mundo.
En esta evaluación, Telcel —que ha invertido en su red 5G en México— destacó por ofrecer conexiones medianas de descarga móvil rápidas. Telcel también planea utilizar la tecnología de segmentación de red (network slicing) para gestionar la posible congestión ante la afluencia de tráfico en su red durante la Copa del Mundo.
Velocidades medianas de descarga móviles en grandes áreas urbanas de México
2º Sem. 2025
Movistar de Telefónica no figura en los gráficos anteriores porque la empresa utiliza la red de AT&T en México —pero Telefónica es responsable de gestionar la experiencia de roaming de sus clientes en el extranjero. Además, directivos de Telefónica han señalado que planean utilizar tecnología de analítica e IA para monitorear la red de la empresa ante posibles cuellos de botella.
Finalmente, un análisis más detallado de las sedes de la Copa del Mundo en México muestra las diferencias entre los proveedores del país, así como las diferencias entre sus diversas tecnologías de red, desde 5G hasta 4G LTE y 3G. Los siguientes gráficos miden el tiempo de carga de la página (en ms), que es el periodo necesario para que una página web específica se muestre en la pantalla de un usuario. Esto sirve como un punto de referencia crítico para la calidad de internet, ya que impacta directamente en la experiencia de navegación del usuario (es decir, qué tan rápido pueden consultar los resultados de la Copa del Mundo). De manera similar, el tiempo de inicio de vídeo es la duración entre el momento en que un usuario presiona “reproducir” y cuando aparece realmente el primer cuadro de su vídeo (es decir, qué tan rápido pueden ver los momentos destacados de la Copa del Mundo). Esto refleja la capacidad de su operador para ofrecer una conexión estable y con buena respuesta.
Como era de esperar, el 5G ofrece consistentemente los tiempos más rápidos tanto para la carga de páginas como para el inicio de vídeos. Además, tanto Telcel como AT&T son destacados. Esto indica que Telcel puede ofrecer una mayor velocidad bruta, pero que la red de AT&T también proporciona tiempos de respuesta rápidos a las solicitudes de los usuarios.
Roaming en 2026: ¿Qué red albergará los datos?
Una última pregunta, tanto para los operadores de red como para los aficionados de la Copa del Mundo, hace referencia a las redes a las que se conectarán sus teléfonos mientras estén en el extranjero. Esta cuestión del roaming crea dinámicas complejas tanto para los usuarios móviles como para los operadores de red.
Para los usuarios, estos deben asegurar su conectividad mientras lidian con la ansiedad de los costos impredecibles y la calidad variable de la red. Mientras tanto, los operadores deben navegar por intrincados acuerdos de roaming que cubren sistemas de facturación, liquidaciones en distintas divisas y una amplia gama de detalles técnicos relacionados con las redes y los teléfonos.
Estas complejidades quedan claras al observar las métricas de roaming entrante de Telcel. Los siguientes gráficos muestran los 10 principales operadores inalámbricos internacionales que se conectaron a la red de Telcel en México en la segunda mitad de 2025, según el número de clientes internacionales en roaming observados en México por los datos de Ookla. Estos datos resaltan no sólo las experiencias que estos viajeros podrían recibir al llegar a México para la Copa del Mundo a finales de este año, sino también los tipos de acuerdos de roaming que los operadores internacionales podrían firmar con América Móvil, la empresa matriz de Telcel.
Estos hallazgos indican que los aficionados de la Copa del Mundo que viajen a México y se conecten a Telcel (el operador más grande del país con aproximadamente el 70% del mercado móvil) deben esperar pasar la mayor parte de su tiempo en la red 4G LTE del operador. No obstante, esa red generalmente proporciona descargas de entre 50 Mbps y 70 Mbps, velocidades que son adecuadas para actividades como consultar los resultados de los equipos y ver los momentos destacados de los partidos. Como era de esperar, la red 5G de Telcel ofrece mejoras claras sobre la 4G LTE, pero sólo algunos de los socios de roaming del operador (como Telus en Canadá) muestran un uso significativo de 5G. Considerando que América Móvil también es propietaria de Claro en Brasil y Guatemala, no es de extrañar que los clientes de esos países también se conecten a la red 5G de América Móvil en México.
Un cálculo final en un análisis de roaming de temática latinoamericana involucra lo opuesto al roaming entrante: el roaming saliente. Aquí analizaremos a los viajeros de Brasil hacia los EE.UU.. Si tenemos en cuenta la tarjeta SIM de los teléfonos de esos usuarios en roaming, T-Mobile es el operador preferido para dos de los tres grandes operadores de redes móviles de Brasil.
Roamers de Brasil a EE.UU.
2º sem. 2025
Posteriormente, una vez establecida esa conexión, los usuarios brasileños en roaming en los EE.UU. a menudo dependen del 5G. Sin embargo, esos clientes en roaming no necesariamente recibieron las conexiones de descarga rápidas que suelen estar disponibles a través del 5G. Los clientes con servicio de Claro de Brasil sí percibieron una mejora de velocidad, pero los de TIM y Vivo experimentaron mejoras más modestas. Esto puede sugerir diferencias en los dispositivos de esos operadores, en los acuerdos de roaming o en la priorización del tráfico.
Por supuesto, aún quedan unos meses para la Copa del Mundo, lo que dará a los operadores más tiempo para expandir y mejorar sus redes, así como para desplegar equipos temporales en ubicaciones seleccionadas donde pueda haber un tráfico de red adicional. No obstante, este informe proporciona una base —una forma de prepararse— para anticiparse a las condiciones de alta demanda.
Ookla estará monitoreando el rendimiento durante y después de los partidos de la Copa del Mundo. Publicaremos más análisis a finales de este año.
Preparação da Rede para a Copa do Mundo de 2026: uma perspectiva latino-americana
A experiência de conectividade dos fãs pode variar bastante dependendo para onde eles estão indo e de onde estão vindo.
A Copa do Mundo de 2026 será gigantesca. Quarenta e oito seleções, 16 estádios e três países-sede – Estados Unidos, Canadá e México – todos tentando acomodar um número colossal de torcedores, jogadores, emissoras e dados móveis em cidades por todo o continente.
A conectividade durante a Copa do Mundo deste ano será crucial. Os ingressos para as partidas serão entregues exclusivamente pelo aplicativo oficial da Copa do Mundo da FIFA 2026™ . E-mails e impressões não serão aceitos.
Além disso, os fãs certamente vão querer usar seus celulares para acompanhar o desempenho de seus times favoritos, enviar selfies, baixar os melhores momentos das partidas e aproveitar o evento como fazem os fãs modernos.
Assim, os dados da Ookla® podem fornecer aos operadores de rede, fornecedores de equipamentos, gestores municipais, torcedores da Copa do Mundo e outros, um guia sobre o tipo de conectividade que podem esperar durante as festividades. Esta análise considerará o evento sob uma perspectiva latino-americana.
Principais conclusões:
Durante a Copa do Mundo de 2026, os torcedores nos estádios dos EUA e arredores podem esperar velocidades médias de download em dispositivos móveis mais rápidas do que nos estádios canadenses. Os estádios no México podem ficar atrás tanto dos EUA quanto do Canadá. O Mercedes-Benz Stadium, em Atlanta, se destaca por oferecer as velocidades de upload e download em dispositivos móveis mais rápidas durante o segundo semestre de 2025.
Em um levantamento realizado em locais da Copa do Mundo no México – que analisou tanto os estádios quanto as áreas onde se espera que os torcedores se reúnam – os serviços móveis da Telcel geralmente oferecem conexões mais rápidas do que AT&T e Altan Redes.
Durante a Copa do Mundo 2026, os serviços de roaming móvel serão cruciais para os viajantes. As experiências dos clientes nesse quesito podem variar bastante. Por exemplo, viajantes com serviços da Claro Brasil podem receber velocidades 5G muito mais rápidas nos EUA em comparação com viajantes que utilizam serviços da TIM ou da Vivo Brasil. Da mesma forma, viajantes que chegam ao México e utilizam a rede da Telcel devem esperar conexões LTE – a menos que tenham adquirido serviços móveis da Telus Canadá, ou sejam originários do Brasil ou da Guatemala e possuam serviços da America Movil, empresa controladora da Telcel. Nesses casos, terão boas chances de se conectar à rede 5G da Telcel no México.
Argentina, Brasil e México contribuíram para um aumento significativo de usuários de roaming móvel da América Latina no Catar durante a Copa do Mundo de 2022. A maioria desses viajantes utilizou Wi-Fi quando disponível, mas aqueles que se conectaram à rede móvel da Vodafone geralmente obtiveram velocidades médias de download mais rápidas do que aqueles que se conectaram à rede da Ooredoo durante o evento quatro anos antes. Os usuários locais não perceberam essa diferença.
Lições aprendidas com o Catar
O Catar sediou a Copa do Mundo há quatro anos, em novembro de 2022, e o evento realizado no país pode servir de guia para torcedores, operadoras de rede e outros que se preparam para a competição deste ano. É importante destacar que a Copa do Mundo de 2022 também permitiu que as operadoras de redes sem fio do país demonstrassem o desempenho do 5G, uma tecnologia em grande parte nova e ainda não testada na época. Os resultados foram impressionantes: a velocidade média de download em 5G atingiu 472,13 Mbps durante o evento, de acordo com uma análise da Ookla em 2022 .
Além deste estudo de desempenho da rede, os dados da Ookla também podem revelar informações sobre os torcedores que viajaram para o Catar para assistir aos jogos. Especificamente, a Arábia Saudita e os Estados Unidos foram os países que mais contribuíram com roaming para o Catar durante a Copa do Mundo de 2022. Esses países também são os que mais contribuem com roaming celular para o Catar anualmente.
Como esta análise tem um enfoque latino-americano, vale a pena notar que Argentina, Brasil e México contribuíram com um aumento significativo de usuários em roaming da região para o Catar durante a Copa do Mundo de 2022, com base nas operadoras de rede que forneceram os chips SIM desses usuários:
A maioria dos viajantes latino-americanos conectou-se via Wi-Fi em vez de rede celular (4G LTE ou 5G) ao torcer por seus times no Catar. Essa descoberta está de acordo com estudos recentes da Ookla sobre o comportamento de viajantes em roaming e provavelmente se deve ao desejo dos torcedores de evitar as tarifas de roaming celular. Outro fator que pode afetar a conectividade dos viajantes é a tecnologia eSIM, que permite que eles ignorem os pacotes de roaming de suas operadoras de origem, optando por planos de dados locais ou regionais que podem ser mais baratos.
Usuários em roaming latino-americanos no Catar, por tecnologia de rede
Novembro de 2022 – Dezembro de 2022
A Personal (Argentina) e a Vivo (Brasil) se destacaram por oferecer aos seus clientes acesso às conexões 5G do Catar. Isso provavelmente se deve às parcerias de roaming entre as operadoras de telefonia móvel no Catar e na América Latina.
É aqui que essas parcerias se tornam importantes. Visitantes do Catar que utilizaram a rede da Vodafone no país experimentaram velocidades médias de download quase duas vezes maiores do que aqueles que se conectaram à rede da Ooredoo – durante a Copa do Mundo de 2022, os usuários locais não observaram essa diferença. Essa diferença nas velocidades de roaming pode ser atribuída às limitações de uso da rede impostas pelas operadoras locais ou pelas operadoras de roaming.
Desempenho da rede para usuários em roaming no Catar Novembro de 2022 – Dezembro de 2022
Operador
Velocidade média de download (Mbps)
Velocidade média de upload (Mbps)
Participação dos viajantes
Ooredoo
48,81
15,98
46%
Vodafone
122,78
21,75
54%
Analisando os estádios de 2026
A Copa do Mundo deste ano será disputada em 16 estádios em três países. E as diferenças de conectividade entre esses locais são evidentes:
Desempenho da Rede Móvel nos Estádios da Copa do Mundo 2026
Speedtest Intelligence | Medições ao nível de código postal em 2025 | Todas as operadoras
Esses resultados – que mostram velocidades médias de download móvel em estádios mexicanos inferiores às do Canadá e dos EUA – também estão em consonância com o Índice Global de Velocidade da Speedtest® para velocidades móveis em todo o país entre os EUA , Canadá e México . Tais resultados geralmente refletem tanto a disponibilidade de amplas alocações de espectro de banda média para o 5G quanto a disposição geral das operadoras em investir nos equipamentos necessários para colocar esse espectro em funcionamento.
No entanto, as velocidades de upload nos estádios não seguem uma distribuição geográfica direta, e a diferença entre os locais também não é tão grande quanto a observada nas velocidades de download. Isso provavelmente será um alívio para os fãs da Copa do Mundo que adoram compartilhar suas comemorações durante os jogos.
Em relação aos locais específicos, o Mercedes-Benz Stadium, em Atlanta, Geórgia, destaca-se como um local de alta velocidade para conexões de upload e download, além de oferecer conexões rápidas e de baixa latência. O estádio foi inaugurado há menos de uma década, em 2017, e, portanto, provavelmente se beneficia das mais recentes tecnologias de redes sem fio, bem como de uma conexão de backhaul robusta que pode transmitir os dados dos torcedores para fora do estádio e para a internet em geral.
Operadoras de redes sem fio geralmente investem em equipamentos dedicados a estádios e outros locais populares com grande fluxo de usuários. Sistemas de antenas distribuídas (DAS) de alta capacidade, estações base temporárias ou espectro de ondas milimétricas (mmWave) podem ser usados para melhor suportar grandes concentrações de usuários, como os que devem comparecer às festividades da Copa do Mundo de 2026. De fato, essas são algumas das técnicas que a Verizon empregou para fornecer velocidades médias de download de 1464,38 Mbps em janeiro, em preparação para o Super Bowl LX, em fevereiro, no Levi’s Stadium, em Santa Clara, Califórnia.
Considerando que esta é uma análise da América Latina, vejamos o México com mais detalhes. Segundo o El Diario , o país espera receber 5,5 milhões de torcedores da Copa do Mundo. As atividades relacionadas à Copa do Mundo por lá devem ir muito além dos estádios do país: Estádio Akron em Guadalajara, Estádio BBVA em Monterrey e Estádio Banorte na Cidade do México.
Assim, analisaremos as métricas em cada uma dessas grandes áreas urbanas. Essas áreas ao redor dos estádios são os locais onde se espera que visitantes e torcedores se hospedem e joguem durante a Copa do Mundo.
Nessa avaliação, a Telcel – que investiu em sua rede 5G no México – se destacou por fornecer conexões móveis com velocidade média de download rápida. A Telcel também planeja usar a tecnologia de fatiamento de rede para gerenciar possíveis congestionamentos em meio ao aumento de tráfego em sua rede durante a Copa do Mundo.
Mediana das velocidades de download móvel nas grandes cidades do México
2S 2025
A Movistar, da Telefónica, não está listada nos gráficos acima porque utiliza a rede da AT&T no México – mas a Telefónica é responsável por gerenciar a experiência de roaming de seus clientes no exterior. Além disso, executivos da Telefónica afirmaram que planejam usar análises e tecnologia de IA para monitorar a rede da empresa em busca de possíveis gargalos.
Por fim, uma análise mais detalhada dos locais da Copa do Mundo no México revela as diferenças entre os provedores do país, bem como entre suas diversas tecnologias de rede, do 5G ao 4G LTE e ao 3G. Os gráficos abaixo medem o tempo de carregamento da página (em ms), que é o período necessário para que uma página da web específica seja exibida na tela do usuário. Isso serve como um parâmetro crítico para a qualidade da internet, pois impacta diretamente a experiência de navegação do usuário (ou seja, a rapidez com que ele pode conferir os resultados da Copa do Mundo). Da mesma forma, o tempo de início do vídeo é a duração entre o momento em que o usuário clica em reproduzir e o momento em que o primeiro quadro do vídeo aparece (ou seja, a rapidez com que ele pode assistir aos melhores momentos da Copa do Mundo). Isso reflete a capacidade da operadora de fornecer uma conexão estável e resposta rápida.
Não é surpresa que o 5G ofereça de maneira consistente os tempos mais rápidos tanto para carregamento de páginas quanto para reprodução de vídeos. Além disso, tanto a Telcel quanto a AT&T se destacam. Isso indica que a Telcel pode oferecer maior velocidade, mas que a rede da AT&T também proporciona tempos de resposta rápidos às solicitações dos usuários.
Roaming em 2026: Qual rede hospedará os dados?
Uma questão final para as operadoras de rede e para os fãs da Copa do Mundo diz respeito às redes às quais seus telefones se conectarão no exterior. Essa questão do roaming cria uma dinâmica complexa tanto para os usuários de telefonia móvel quanto para as operadoras.
Para os usuários, a conectividade é um desafio, ao mesmo tempo que enfrentam a ansiedade causada por custos imprevisíveis e qualidade de rede variável. Enquanto isso, as operadoras precisam lidar com acordos de roaming complexos, que abrangem sistemas de faturamento, pagamentos em diferentes moedas e uma ampla gama de detalhes técnicos relacionados à rede e aos telefones.
Essas complexidades ficam evidentes ao analisarmos as métricas de roaming de entrada da Telcel. Os gráficos abaixo mostram as 10 principais operadoras internacionais de telefonia móvel que se conectaram à rede da Telcel no México no segundo semestre de 2025, com base no número de clientes internacionais em roaming no México, conforme observado nos dados da Ookla. Esses dados destacam não apenas as experiências que esses viajantes poderão ter ao chegar ao México para a Copa do Mundo ainda este ano, mas também os tipos de acordos de roaming que as operadoras internacionais poderão firmar com a América Móvil, controladora da Telcel.
Esses resultados indicam que os torcedores da Copa do Mundo que viajarem para o México e se conectarem à Telcel (a maior operadora do país, com aproximadamente 70% do mercado de telefonia móvel) devem esperar passar a maior parte do tempo na rede 4G LTE da operadora. No entanto, essa rede geralmente oferece downloads entre 50 Mbps e 70 Mbps, velocidades adequadas para atividades como consultar o placar e assistir a melhores momentos das partidas. A rede 5G da Telcel oferece melhorias claras em relação ao 4G LTE, mas apenas algumas das parceiras de roaming da operadora (como a Telus no Canadá) apresentam uso significativo do 5G. Considerando que a América Móvil também é proprietária da Claro no Brasil e na Guatemala, não é surpresa que clientes desses países também se conectem à rede 5G da América Móvil no México.
Um cálculo final em uma análise de roaming com foco na América Latina envolve o inverso do roaming de entrada: o roaming de saída. Aqui, analisaremos viajantes do Brasil para os EUA; com base no chip SIM dos celulares desses usuários, a T-Mobile é a operadora preferida de duas das três maiores operadoras de telefonia móvel do Brasil.
Viajantes em roaming do Brasil para os EUA
2º Semestre de 2025
Depois que essa conexão era estabelecida, os brasileiros em roaming nos EUA frequentemente utilizavam o 5G. No entanto, esses clientes em roaming nem sempre recebiam as altas velocidades de download normalmente oferecidas pelo 5G. Clientes da operadora brasileira Claro observaram um aumento na velocidade, enquanto os da TIM e da Vivo experimentaram melhorias mais modestas. Isso pode indicar diferenças nos dispositivos dessas operadoras, nos acordos de roaming ou na priorização de tráfego.
É claro que a Copa do Mundo ainda está a alguns meses de distância, o que dará às operadoras mais tempo para expandir e aprimorar suas redes, bem como para implantar equipamentos temporários em locais selecionados onde possa haver tráfego de rede adicional. No entanto, este relatório fornece uma base de referência – uma forma de se preparar – em antecipação a condições de alta demanda.
A Ookla estará monitorando o desempenho durante e após as partidas da Copa do Mundo – aguarde mais análises ainda este ano.
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.
Mike Dano is a Lead Industry Analyst in Ookla’s research and content team. He covers the North and South American markets, and global technology trends. Previously, Mike was a journalist covering the global telecom industry for 25 years at publications including RCR Wireless News, Fierce Network and Light Reading.
Ookla Speedtest data reveals hurricane-caused patterns in networks on land, in the air, and in space.
Natural disasters like hurricanes may seem to have unpredictable consequences, but their interaction with people and telecommunications networks tell a story that is, perhaps unexpectedly, rational. The patterns in Ookla SpeedtestⓇ data provide an explanation of the resiliency of physical networks – mobile, fixed, even satellite, and, as seen in Ookla’s report on last year’s Iberian power grid collapse, the electricity network.
In examining the Ookla Speedtest data of these relationships, this article contributes to the corpus of research, monitoring and understanding of scaled natural disasters – hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, volcanoes. Many organizations such as universities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) avail themselves of network observability and performance data through the Ookla for Good program. Another entity to note is the Emergency Telecommunications Cluster (ETC), a global network of organizations that work together to provide shared communications services in humanitarian emergencies, which provides a thorough account of Hurricane Melissa.
The goal of these efforts is to prevent, mitigate, or shorten the recovery of communications networks for the betterment of the human condition during the most desperate times of need.
Key Takeaways
Power first – telco resiliency starts with the electricity grid. Telecommunications networks are beholden to the electricity grid.Hardened telecommunications infrastructure is meaningless if the power is out, particularly for longer periods of time that extend beyond backup power remedies, as was the case, particularly in western Jamaican parishes of St. Elizabeth and Westmoreland with Hurricane Melissa.
Mobile and fixed networks are differently resilient with widespread power outages. Mobile networks can absorb the storm impact with degraded service, supported by backup battery (4 to 8 hours) and generators (up to five days on a full tank), but be slower to recover performance with its distributed infrastructure. Fixed networks, though susceptible to localized fiber damage, tend to be “down or up” based on the power grid.
Satellite equipment and service is crucial. Even when the power grid fails, generators and backup batteries can maintain communications on satellite terminals, which is particularly important in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane (or any natural disaster). Starlink saw a fivefold increase in usage in the month following Hurricane Melissa.
The substitutability of mobile, fixed and satellite forms a layered, resilient, converged connectivity solution which provides a safety net for first responders, disaster recovery, and the people in need. Regulators, understanding the sequence of failure, resilience, and recovery, can plan for (prioritized) cellular connectivity during and in the immediate aftermath. Then, deploy satellite terminals (and power solutions) to hotspots. Consider all three connectivity solutions for permanent installation in critical facilities (police/fire, hospitals and other medical facilities, schools and community centers).
Speedtest users testing networks
On October 21, 2025, a weather system developed into Tropical Storm Melissa in the central Caribbean and October 25-27 grew from a Category 1 to a Category 5 hurricane. In the early afternoon of October 28, Hurricane Melissa made landfall in southwesternJamaica with maximum sustained winds around 185 mph. By evening, Melissa had crossed the island, exiting the north coast toward Cuba.
Especially in times of emergencies, people want to know that their network works. Far more Speedtest user samples are generated by fixed line customers than mobile. The linear scale first chart represents the relative magnitude of testing by service provider. Then, in order to better observe the mobile user testing behavior, the same data is presented on a logarithmic scale.
Mobile and fixed Speedtest users and sample data demonstrated rational behavior, but in opposite directions. Anticipating landfall, mobile use of Speedtest increased from October 26 in the two days prior to landfall. Understandably, the human concern about staying connected with others encouraged “checking” their cellular network, and moreover, the increased need for communications via mobile phone, given impending conditions. Then with hurricane landfall on October 28, there was a clear step-up in user usage of their mobile networks (seen more easily in the log scale chart) that sustained its level of Speedtest user testing activity through the end of the year.
On the fixed side, Speedtest samples immediately decreased, which is the opposite of mobile. This pattern difference by access technology has been seen before in other natural disasters and was expected. When a fixed connection goes out, there is nothing to test. It is offline. A mobile network, by contrast, has more resiliency with battery and generator back up (as long as its own fixed backhaul is intact). Moreover, people unsuccessfully testing the fixed network may have shifted testing over to mobile networks.
Nine days after landfall, as is evident in the reduced Speedtest samples for Flow (fixed) and Digicel+ (fixed), recovery had much more to go, with power restoration just around 50%. Flow parent company Liberty Latin America’s reported recovery status in its 3Q 2025 earnings on November 6, 2025, (edited for relevance and brevity):
Damage is significant in the rest of the country (Kingston in the more populated east much less) impacted by the speed of power restoration on the island.
…quite a bit of our outages… (is) because of power or the lack of it. As the power comes back, you’ll see our network recover.
…many homes in Puerto Rico have generators given the frequent power outages on the island, we launched a product that allows our fixed service to be up and running during these power outages by defaulting to the mobile network.
Starlink flies in
With widespread infrastructure damage knocking out the (mostly above ground) mobile and fiber networks, Starlink satellite service offered a lifeline. As in prior disasters, SpaceX (Starlink’s parent company) enabled a period of free service immediately following the hurricane’s landfall, through the end of November 2025.
This free support included a mix of service and hardware donations, including waived monthly subscription fees for existing customers and kits provided to the Jamaican government. Additional donations from NGOs and private donors were distributed to essential services like the Jamaica Defence Force (JDF), hospitals, police, and disaster relief centers.
In the Speedtest Sample chart, the adoption and prevalence of Starlink’s satellite internet service demonstrates its role in disaster scenarios. The number of Speedtest user samples increased fivefold from prior to Melissa to the last week of the free service period in November.
Samples did not decrease immediately after the free period, suggesting that it takes time for people to react to the end of the free period. Indeed, in early 2026, Starlink Speedtest samples trended down from the rates observed in November and December 2025.
The increase in Starlink Speedtest user samples was also clear in its geographic density from October 2025 to November 2025.
Returning to the Liberty Latin America earnings call:
…we’re using Starlink for our B2B customers, we fired up Starlink as a backup to our fixed product. Where our fixed product is down, Starlink comes up. Now where there’s no power into that business,then it doesn’t matter what the method of connectivity is.
Ookla’s vision of “Better Connectivity for All” relies on the power grid, too.
Network performance
Having examined the behaviors in network testing frequency during the hurricane, our focus now shifts to the actual performance of the networks, specifically looking at two core metrics: speed and latency.
The download speeds for fixed ISPs Digicel+ and Flow performed relatively similarly through the event. For a speed performance measurement, this is expected because, even though we saw fewer Speedtest samples during and immediately after landfall, when (or if) a user is able to connect to a fixed network, the service capability of the network is present. Connecting is the key; the data speeds are usually maintained.
Digicel+ (fixed) was clocking download median speeds around 90 Mbps the weeks prior to the hurricane. After some post-landfall variability, it returned to that standard in November. December witnessed a slower download speed performance around a still-serviceable 80 Mbps, and since then has climbed back to near 90 Mbps in March 2026 (not shown).
Flow (fixed), compared to before the hurricane when it was registering around 100 Mbps median download speed, and after relative instability, performed faster through November at around 130 Mbps. Then, through December, it began trending back nearer its pre-Melissa standard as network restoration took hold and stabilized. This trend continued into 2026 and, like Digicel+ (fixed), Flow (fixed) returned to its pre-hurricane speeds.
On the mobile side, increased user demand prior to Hurricane Melissa resulted in slower cellular network performance. Then, with Melissa came physical damage to cell towers, backhaul transport, and the electrical grid. The remainder of the operating cellular network had to carry the burden of increased user demand. Furthermore, in the day or two immediately following landfall, as backup power to the cell sites (battery, gas generator) ran out, the cellular network coverage and performance deteriorated.
Prior to landfall, Digicel (mobile) delivered median download speeds around 30 Mbps and Flow (mobile) around 35 Mbps on a down trend. In the days and weeks following, these speeds averaged around 12 Mbps and 20 Mbps, respectively. In December, Digicel (mobile) remained around 12 Mbps while Flow (mobile) had gradually increased to 25 Mbps. In 2026, both improved with Digicel (mobile) passing 20 Mbps and Flow (mobile) exceeding 30 Mbps – essentially recovering to pre-Melissa.
Starlink, which made its service available for free (to those with terminals and electricity), increased its users and usage (and Speedtest samples). Satellite network capacity, being a fundamentally fixed resource in this time frame, meant that as more people used Starlink, network speed got slower. This is entirely expected – more traffic increased network loading, inversely performance speeds degraded.
In the first week of November (when the Starlink service was made available) median download speeds were around 90 Mbps. By early December, download speeds had declined to around 50 Mbps, then finishing the calendar around 35 Mbps.
Compared to speed performance, latency reveals clearer breaks – literally – in network performance. Immediately after Hurricane Melissa came ashore, something broke and latency for each fixed and mobile provider increased by between 36% to 76%.
Multi-Server Latencies (ms)
Provider
Normal State Oct 15 – 27
Mesa Top Oct 28 – Nov 18
Recovery Nov 19 – Dec 31
Digicel+ (fixed)
38
+ 26 = 64
– 16 = 48
Flow (fixed)
29
+ 22 = 51
– 14 = 37
Digicel (mobile)
60
+ 36 = 96
– 18 = 78
Flow (mobile)
56
+ 20 = 76
– 0 = 76
What broke were key southern terrestrial fiber corridors connecting the west to the east (where the main submarine fiber landings are in Kingston), physically snapped by landslides and falling utility poles. This resulted in the data traffic getting rerouted, physically traveling longer distances via north coast fiber to reach Kingston, and, in some cases, routed via Starlink satellites.
Fixed and mobile network latencies moved together because they share the same infrastructure. The fiber that connects the fixed network also connects the cell tower.
The mesa top plateau is noteworthy. Had the delay been caused by congestion, the line would be jagged or spiky. But since the shape was expressed relatively flat, this indicates that the delay was propagation– traveling a longer distance.
Recovery came with fiber splicing repairs by Flow and Digicel on the south ring and terrestrial corridors. When the glass fibers were melted back together in the western parishes, the short path was restored and the latency dropped.
Except Flow (mobile), which did not experience the drop in latency alongside the others, even as Flow’s own fixed network and Digicel’s mobile/fixed networks recovered. As mentioned above, the traffic that was routed over Starlink satellites included Flow (mobile)’s. This allowed Flow (mobile) to restore coverage quickly, and kept this satellite backhaul solution in place even as fiber was repaired.
Starlink latency, with its infrastructure in the sky (and no ground station in Jamaica to lose power), was sheltered from the storm’s effects.
Mobile network signal
Hurricane Melissa caused severe damage to Jamaica’s power and telecommunications grid (fiber cuts, tower collapses) particularly in the parishes of St. Elizabeth and Westmoreland in the southwest, where the center of Melissa came ashore. These parishes, along with Hanover in the northwest corner and St. James on the hurricane’s path north, likely faced the most significant infrastructure collapse in the island’s history.
Melissa’s destructive force is starkly represented in the pre-landfall (Oct 21–27) map compared with that of landfall (Oct 28–Nov 3). Wireless network signal strength flipped from Good to Poor in an instant. Even the following week (Nov 4–10), the devastation to the wireless infrastructure persisted. By mid-November the recovery picture begins to manifest with less poor signal, though some poor signal areas stubbornly remained into December.
Not only did signal strength weaken, the white space grew, representing where there was no signal at all.
In fact, the hurricane impact nearly tripled the no service rates. Pre-hurricane no service signal data hovered around 3% in a tight plot, increasing to over 8% and a wider plot during the impact period (Oct 28–31). As expected in November with recovery efforts, no service signal data reduced to 6% and a retightening distribution became evident.
This behavior was also illustrated by plotting the no service data by signal strength (RSRP, Reference Signal Received Power) for each phase. Pre-hurricane (blue) signal data is tightly clustered vertically with a low proportion (~3%) having No Service. The hurricane impact effectively scattered more no service data samples (red) into weaker signal strength (~8% and spread out). The recovery (green) pulls the proportion of no service back down (~6%) and regathers the spread in the direction of pre-hurricane.
For Flow’s mobile customers who encountered no service (and also possessing a capable mobile phone), its parent company Liberty Latin America along with Starlink, provided direct-to-cell (D2C) “essential services including data, SMS, and text communications.”
No JPS, no internet
Jamaica Public Service, the electricity utility company for the island, stated that 77% of its customers did not have power when it began restoration. The telecommunications networks obviously cannot function without power. Battery and generator backups mostly delayed the inevitable collapse caused by the force of Hurricane Melissa.
In this context, the behavior and performance of fixed, mobile and satellite telecommunications in Hurricane Melissa are summed up as follows:
Fixed service was binary. When it worked, it mostly worked as normal. However, when it was not working, it was completely offline. Recovery, once achieved, returned the service to normal.
Mobile service initially resisted degradation (with backup power or coverage from neighbor cellular sites), but the scale of the devastation overwhelmed the infrastructure and service degraded rapidly. After a period of weeks, fixing the fiber paths restored latency performance all at once, but the full recovery of mobile service was essentially gradual, with restoration occurring cell site by cell site.
Satellite service data speed was stable and gradually slowed, based on users coming onto Starlink building traffic and demand. If this becomes more widely adopted, either as a primary or a failover connectivity solution, the capacity of the service may experience sudden congestion and degraded speeds in the event of fixed and wireless network outages.
Hardening of the power grid and telecommunications infrastructure are not a “fix” per se, but instead an ongoing state of operations in Jamaica. Inherently non-terrestrial, Starlink provided critical telecommunications network diversity. Satellite service is now, or soon will be, part of every telecommunications service providers’ network resilience in Jamaica, the Caribbean, and the world.
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.
Kerry Baker leads Ookla's research and content efforts in North America. He has over 20 years experience in the telecom industry, primarily at T-Mobile studying network performance benchmarking and customer experience. Kerry also has founder’s experience with four technology-related startups. Kerry holds masters degrees from the University of Washington in Business and International Political Economics.
Evaluating the Real-World Performance of Apple’s C1X Modem
Apple’s iPhone Air is more than a design experiment; it is a strategic overhaul of its smartphone line-up, with broader implications for Apple devices beyond its smartphones. The ultra-thin form factor has allowed Apple to experiment with its new modem in the wild. Using global Ookla Speedtest data, this report analyzes the real-world performance of Apple’s custom C1X modem in the iPhone Air. It provides a technical analysis of Apple’s custom C1X modem, outlining how Apple’s in-house RF engineering has closed the connectivity gap with established industry giants, with the data suggesting it has achieved true download parity and set new standards for network latency.
Key Takeaways:
The C1X elevates Apple’s in-house RF capabilities to tier 1 status. Data from Q4 2025 unequivocally demonstrates that Apple’s in-house C1X modem represents a generational leap over the previous C1 model. Our data indicates that it has achieved real-world parity in download and latency performance with the Qualcomm X80 across numerous networks in both ideal and challenging conditions, proving the silicon is a performance equalizer rather than a compromise. That said, it must be noted that flagship Android devices launching in 1H 2026 will use the Qualcomm X85 modem, which will likely deliver performance upgrades over the X80.
Tighter integration makes latency the new differentiator. The iPhone Air outperformed the Qualcomm-based iPhone 17 Pro Max in latency metrics across 19 of 22 analyzed markets. This suggests that Apple’s tighter modem-to-processor integration may deliver a snappier user experience, and could be a key differentiating point for Apple silicon-equipped devices.
The “Slim Flagship” proves viable as Apple sunsets the iPhone Plus. By replacing the iPhone Plus with the design-centric iPhone Air, Apple increased the share of that portfolio slot based on Speedtest samples, from 2.9% to 6.8% in the U.S. in Q4 2025. While overall global adoption does not appear to have met Apple’s expectations, the slim form factor has successfully secured a dedicated demographic, with strong adoption in design-conscious markets like South Korea (11.2%) and Japan (8.9%).
iPhone Air marginalizes competing slim form-factors. The iPhone Air has largely eclipsed the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge globally, out-sampling it 3-to-1 in the U.S. based on Speedtest data, while the Edge remains statistically negligible in terms of adoption across European markets. South Korea remains the primary competitive exception, driven by strong home-market bias.
Uplink carrier aggregation remains a sticking point for Apple silicon. The Qualcomm X80-equipped iPhone 17 Pro Max maintained up to a 32% lead in upload speeds, highlighting that Apple’s cellular modem may be held back by limited uplink carrier aggregation capability. While Apple has achieved parity in download metrics, Qualcomm’s mature implementation of Uplink Carrier Aggregation (UL-CA) remains the industry benchmark. This capability is critical for ‘prosumer’ tasks like high-resolution video broadcasting and large file uploads to cloud environments.
The “Air” pivot: how Apple captured the slim premium market
The global rollout of the iPhone Air has revealed a stark geographical divide in consumer behavior, distinguishing between regions that prioritize industrial design and those anchored by “power user” requirements. There are six models in Apple’s iPhone 17 generation of smartphones — the iPhone 17, the iPhone 17 Pro, iPhone 17 Pro Max, the iPhone Air, which replaces the “Plus” model in the lineup, and the recently announced iPhone 17e.
While the device has struggled to move beyond a niche role in markets like the United States, it has found greater traction in regions where form-factor innovation and device portability are paramount.
iPhone Air – Share of iPhone Generation 17 Samples (%)
Speedtest Intelligence, Q4 2025
Advanced Asian markets lead global adoption
South Korea (11.2% share), Japan (8.9% share) and Singapore (8.4%) led iPhone Air adoption globally based on Speedtest samples, emerging as the primary strongholds for the new design. This trend suggests the “Slim” philosophy appeals deeply to demographics seeking a premium alternative to the ubiquitous, large-screen devices that have dominated the flagship landscape for years. Our earlier analysis of the iPhone 16e with the C1 modem also highlighted Japan as a stronghold for a smaller device form-factor, and iPhone Air adoption follows this trend.
Prepaid and price-sensitive markets resist the form-factor shift
Europe presents a fragmented picture. Design-forward markets like Sweden (8.6%) and Italy (7.7%) show strong uptake, while the U.K. (6.5%) aligns more closely with conservative North American purchasing patterns. Apple users across many developed markets have been preconditioned to adopt the latest iteration, as part of regular contract upgrade cycles, while carrier promotions are likely to have skewed towards this anticipated demand, making it harder for a new variant to establish market share. The story for the iPhone Air is worse in more prepaid, price sensitive Asian and Latin American markets such as Malaysia, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Mexico.
U.S. deep dive: sunsetting the “Plus” model doubles mid-tier share
At a 6.8% adoption rate, the United States sits in the lower half of the global adoption table. While this figure may appear modest, it represents a shift in the domestic landscape. Rather than indicating a lack of interest, this 6.8% share signals a more distributed and balanced installed base of iPhone models than in previous cycles, proving that there is a definitive, albeit specific, place for a slim flagship in the U.S. portfolio.
Comparing the launch dynamics of the iPhone 16 family in late 2024 against the iPhone 17 family a year later confirms that the “Air” was a necessary strategic pivot for Apple’s non-Pro lineup. For several cycles, the “Plus” model occupied a difficult position in the portfolio—offering a larger screen without the premium features of the Pro Max—which resulted in tepid consumer interest.
From Plus to Air – iPhone Share Comparison, by Generation (based on Speedtest samples)
Speedtest Intelligence, Q4 2025
In 2024, the iPhone 16 Plus was the clear laggard of the range, capturing a mere 2.9% of the launch mix. By sunsetting the iPhone Plus and replacing it with the design-centric iPhone Air, Apple more than doubled the share of this roster slot to 6.8%. This suggests that “Slim” as a category successfully resonates with a segment of the market that “Large” simply did not.
A primary concern with any new mid-tier entry is the potential for it to erode the high margins of the “Pro” models. However, the data confirms that the ultra-premium customer remains immovable.
Pro Max Stability: The iPhone 17 Pro Max held 55.5% of the market, effectively identical to the 56.3% share held by its predecessor the 16 Pro Max.
The Shift from Pro: Instead, the Air successfully drew its audience from the standard Pro model, which saw its share drop from 34.9% to 30.6%.
This migration indicates that approximately 4% of the total user base was willing to trade the telephoto lens and raw processing power of the iPhone 17 Pro for the slimmer form-factor of the iPhone Air. The removal of the confusing “Plus” model also appears to have benefited the entry-level tier. With a more streamlined choice between “Standard,” “Slim,” or “Pro,” the base iPhone 17 grew its share to 7.0%, up from 5.9% for the previous generation. This consolidation suggests that budget-conscious premium buyers now find the standard model a more compelling baseline without the distraction of an overlapping large-screen variant.
Form-factor wars: iPhone Air marginalizes the Galaxy S25 Edge
While both Apple and Samsung attempted to capitalize on the slim form-factor in 2025, market data shows a significant disparity in consumer uptake. Outside of South Korea, where the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge holds a competitive 8.7% share against the Air’s 11.2%, the device has seen negligible adoption. In the U.S., the iPhone Air out-samples the S25 Edge by a margin of 3-to-1 (6.8% vs. 2.4%). In markets like the U.K. and Germany, the S25 Edge records minimal market penetration, with less than 1% share.
The modem wars – Apple silicon comes of age
Apple’s newest hardware cycle centered on a key question: could Apple’s first high-performance modem, the C1X, improve upon the original C1? Furthermore, could it match the industry-standard Qualcomm X80, without the thermal headroom of a “Pro” chassis. Despite its slim form-factor, the iPhone Air does include a vapor chamber to aid cooling, while its titanium frame also aids heat dispersion. Qualcomm remains a formidable incumbent with its X85 modem, which alongside MediaTek’s M90, will feature in newer Android flagship devices this year. Based on comparisons with the X80, our data suggests that Apple’s silicon has reached a critical maturity point, shifting the conversation from a performance gap to a strategic “equalizer” in real-world performance.
Comparing iPhone 17 Pro Max (X80), iPhone Air (C1X), & iPhone 16e (C1)
5G Download Speeds (Mbps) – 90th, Median, and 10th Percentiles, Q4 2025, Speedtest Intelligence
Note: There were insufficient samples (<100) to include the iPhone 16e in the analysis for both Singapore and South Korea
The iPhone Air with C1X modem does not trump the iPhone 17 Pro Max with Qualcomm X80 in terms of raw, theoretical peak power, but across many performance aspects it has achieved parity for general consumer use. Expanding on the top 10th, median, and bottom 10th percentile data gives us the most comprehensive look yet at how the C1X handles the real-world spectrum of 5G connectivity. The data shows that the C1X provides a generational leap over the C1 modem, with clear improvements at both the 10th percentile (representing the most challenging network conditions), and the 90th percentile (representing the best network conditions).
The median provides a snapshot of what the typical user experiences on a daily basis. At this level, we are not looking at stress tests or perfect laboratory conditions, but rather the reality of typical network congestion and mid-tier signal strength.
The C1X delivered a lead over the C1 in virtually all the markets in this study, based on median download speeds. This was particularly apparent for the UAE, U.S., Saudi Arabia, China, Sweden, Singapore, and Japan. In these markets, the C1X is clearly able to tap into mid-band 5G spectrum far more efficiently than the C1 during typical daytime congestion. At the other end of the scale, the C1X saw no meaningful improvement over the C1 in Brazil, India and Malaysia. This suggests the specific 5G deployment strategies in these markets, for example relying more heavily on low-band DSS rather than dedicated mid-band, or more widespread 5G network congestion, are neutralizing the more advanced capabilities of the C1X.
Compared to the iPhone 17 Pro Max with the X80 modem, the C1X performed remarkably consistently on median download speeds. While the Qualcomm fueled X80 retains an overall advantage, with stronger leads in Taiwan and Poland in particular, the C1X approaches X80 performance levels in many markets, with median users unlikely to notice much difference in download heavy use cases.
iPhone Air – Median 5G Performance Uplift
iPhone Air vs iPhone 17 Pro Max and iPhone 16e, Speedtest Intelligence, Q4 2025
For the average consumer, the iPhone Air’s C1X modem provides a highly visible upgrade over the iPhone 16e in terms of content-sharing capability for most of the markets in this analysis. While an extra 5-10 Mbps might sound small for a download, for an upload, it can cut sharing times significantly. The C1X managed to deliver a more equitable upload experience compared to the iPhone 17 Pro Max with the X80, with the variance between +/- 5 Mbps for most markets, with the exception of Taiwan (-8.6 Mbps), Malaysia (+5.6 Mbps), India (-5.2 Mbps), Poland (-7.3 Mbps) and the UAE (-9.2 Mbps).
By analyzing the median latency of the iPhone Air (C1X) alongside both the budget iPhone 16e (C1) and the premium 17 Pro Max (X80), a clear narrative emerges: Apple has built the most responsive modem for daily use on the market. This latency advantage is a critical metric moving forward; as mobile experiences increasingly rely on real-time generative AI and cloud computing, shaving milliseconds off network responsiveness will be a key differentiator in how ‘fast’ a device feels to the user. The C1X modem consistently provides a responsiveness upgrade over the C1 modem, particularly noticeable in China (+6 ms advantage), Indonesia (+6 ms), and the United States (+5 ms). It also provides a latency boost over the iPhone 17 Pro Max across the vast majority of markets, with the exception of Taiwan and Japan.
The usability cliff: C1X sustains connectivity at the cell edge
By isolating the 10th percentile (bottom 10%) of the data, we are effectively stress-testing the modems. This data represents the user experience when signal strength is at its worst—standing at the edge of a cell tower’s range, deep inside a concrete building, or in a heavily congested area. In weak signal conditions, download speeds often drop to levels where basic apps (maps, video calls) can struggle to function.
The C1X in the iPhone Air helps guard against this “usability cliff” in the majority of markets, representing a substantial lift in 10th percentile performance vs. the C1, and converging with the performance of the X80 in the iPhone 17 Pro Max.
iPhone Air – 10th Percentile 5G Performance Uplift
iPhone Air vs iPhone 17 Pro Max and iPhone 16e, Speedtest Intelligence, Q4 2025
The C1X shows significant upside vs. the C1 in more advanced 5G networks, including the UAE, Singapore, China, the U.S., France and Saudi Arabia. These markets, as identified by our recent flagship 5G Standalone report are among the leading markets for 5G Standalone and 5G Advanced adoption. The iPhone Air, via its C1X modem is clearly able to take greater advantage of these more advanced 5G networks than the C1. The performance delta of the C1X vs. the iPhone Pro Max with X80 modem is a closer affair. While it lags in the fastest market globally – the UAE, as well as in Saudi Arabia and Taiwan – performance is much closer in the vast majority of markets.
Upload speeds are typically the first thing to collapse when moving away from a cell tower, as the phone’s internal transmitter lacks the power of a macro tower. Because 5G networks are provisioned with greater capacity for download, the total available upload bandwidth can often be very low in weak signal areas, and in these cases an absolute difference of +1.0 Mbps can be transformative—the difference between a message timing out, and successfully sending a photo or making a FaceTime audio call.
As with download performance at the 10th percentile, in a majority of the markets in this analysis the C1X powered iPhone Air demonstrated superior performance to the C1, coming closer to that of the iPhone 17 Pro Max. In Singapore, the C1X delivered an additional 4.3 Mbps over the C1 – the largest gap between the two, putting it on par with the X80. It also provides a vital cushion in upload performance at the 10th percentile in markets such as China (+1.3 Mbps), the U.S. (+1.0 Mbps), Malaysia (+1.1 Mbps), Brazil (+1.0 Mbps), and France (+0.6 Mbps). Compared to the X80, the C1X performed similarly in many markets, including for example the U.S, Spain, France and Italy, but fell behind once again in the UAE and Taiwan.
Hardware ceilings: Apple silicon matches Qualcomm in optimal conditions
Shifting our analysis to the 90th percentile (top 10% of samples) allows us to measure the “throughput ceiling” of the devices. This data represents the user experience when network conditions are more optimal—typically outdoors with a good line of sight to a 5G tower with minimal network congestion. By looking at these optimal conditions, we can see the exact points where the C1 modem in the iPhone 16e physically caps out, and how much further the C1X modem in the iPhone Air can push.
iPhone Air – 90th Percentile 5G Performance Uplift
iPhone Air vs iPhone 17 Pro Max and iPhone 16e, Speedtest Intelligence, Q4 2025
The most striking takeaway is that the iPhone Air can approach or exceed gigabit download speeds in ideal conditions, whereas the iPhone 16e hits a hard wall well below that mark.
UAE: The Air capitalizes on the fastest 5G market in the world, to deliver a +643.9 Mbps advantage over the 16e (1,832.3 Mbps vs. 1,188.4 Mbps).
Saudi Arabia: The Air provides +362.8 Mbps more bandwidth (970.0 Mbps vs. 607.2 Mbps).
United States: The Air achieves 818.0 Mbps, a +264.4 Mbps lead over the 16e (553.6 Mbps).
In nearly every developed market (Sweden, China, Germany, Japan, UK), the C1X delivers a 30-40% advantage over the C1 at the 90th percentile on download performance. This indicates that the C1 lacks the capability to process the maximum bandwidth available on these 5G networks. Malaysia remains the sole market where the 16e outperforms the Air (-9.6%), further indicating a localized network configuration that strongly favors the simpler C1 architecture.
The C1X modem consistently pushes more upload bandwidth than the C1 modem, with performance at the 90th percentile extending gains already seen by the median user, from a typical 5-10 Mbps improvement, to a typical 5-25 Mbps improvement. The most significant gains were recorded in China, Mexico, Poland, Singapore and Sweden, with only two markets showing meaningful advantages for the older C1 – Malaysia and the UAE.
Qualcomm modems (like the X80 in the Pro Max), in contrast to the C1 modem, offer upload Carrier Aggregation. As a result the iPhone 17 Pro Max with the X80 consistently beats the iPhone 16e at the 90th percentile. However, the top 10th percentile data shows that Apple’s in-house C1X has practically closed this gap. In many major markets, the difference between the two flagship modems is too small to matter, with marginal differences in upload performance in France, Sweden, Australia, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, the UK and Japan. For consumers, this data shows that choosing the ultra-thin form-factor of the “Air” requires no discernable sacrifice in peak 5G performance compared to the bulkier, more capable “Pro” device.
If the C1X was a compromised, mid-tier modem, it would show a massive gap against the Qualcomm X80 at the absolute top end. Instead, the data reveals that under optimal conditions, the Apple silicon operates at nearly the same flagship tier as Qualcomm, frequently trading blows based on local network configuration. This parity, however, is not a mirror image of the two architectures. The distinction between the two flagship modems at the 90th percentile is increasingly defined by spectral management rather than raw speed. Qualcomm’s X80 architecture exhibits a more mature handling of multi-band 5G environments, likely benefiting from a broader library of global field testing. Conversely, Apple’s C1X shows a highly optimized path for specific high-capacity mid-band frequencies. For the Pro Max user, the X80 offers a safety net of consistency across a wider variety of global carrier configurations; for the Air user, the C1X offers a ‘best-case’ experience that is now indistinguishable from the industry leader.
The 90th percentile (optimal network conditions) is where throughput ceases to be as much of a bottleneck for 5G connections, latency (responsiveness) takes center stage. While peak throughput often dominates headlines, the iPhone Air’s most significant win is in responsiveness. The data shows that latency is the single biggest improvement for Apple’s newer C1X modem. The iPhone Air delivers lower latency than the iPhone 16e in 18 of the 22 markets in this analysis, and in 19 of 22 markets when compared to the iPhone 17 Pro Max.
A foundation for the C2 and beyond
The introduction of the iPhone Air and its C1X modem confirms that Apple’s custom RF silicon is no longer a work in progress, achieving real-world download parity with the Qualcomm X80 in the iPhone 17 Pro Max, and outpacing it on latency. The modem’s lead in responsiveness will benefit Apple’s hardware in an AI-first world, where network latency will represent a clear bottleneck for real-time cloud computing.
However, the C1X is merely the opening salvo. As we look ahead to the anticipated launch of the iPhone 18 and the likely next-generation C2 modem later this year, Apple’s immediate engineering hurdle remains mastering complex uplink carrier aggregation. They must close this final gap against a moving target, as flagship Android devices transition to the Qualcomm X85 and in the future to the X105, which according to Qualcomm will both offer faster peak speeds and greater efficiency than the X80. Yet, the most disruptive potential of Apple’s modem program ultimately lies beyond the smartphone. The power efficiency and architectural integration demonstrated by the C1X sets the stage for the long-rumored “Always-Connected MacBook.” By embedding the C2 (or its derivatives) in its Apple MacBooks, Apple is poised to sever the MacBook’s reliance on Wi-Fi alone, and in doing so, redefine baseline expectations for portable computing.
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.
Mark Giles heads up Ookla Research™, leading a team of expert analysts in transforming the world's largest repository of network performance data into authoritative insights. Mark is passionate about using data to illuminate the state of global connectivity, in order to advocate for a better, more accessible internet for all.
A new Ookla report found that the digital divide has narrowed in 33 states during the first half of 2025.
Key Takeaways
The number of states with 60% or more of Speedtest users experiencing the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream jumped from 22 states and the District of Columbia in the 2H of 2024 to 38 states and the District of Columbia in 1H of 2025.
The digital divide between urban and rural users improved in the first half of 2025 with 33 states seeing the gap between the percentage of fixed urban users and fixed rural users that receive the minimum required FCC broadband speeds lessen during that time while 17 states saw that gap grow in the first half of 2025 compared to the second half of 2024. Ookla uses the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification to determine which users are urban vs. rural.
The digital divide doesn’t exist for many Starlink users. In 26 out of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, rural users get better broadband speeds than their urban counterparts. This is likely due to Starlink’s ability to overcome the geographic and cost barriers that make delivering fixed rural broadband so difficult.
U.S. broadband speeds are on the uptick, and more users are getting better performance than ever from their broadband connectivity. However, there are still some states (particularly those with lower population density and vast terrain) that are struggling to deliver broadband services to their residents.
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® data found that the number of states that are able to deliver fixed broadband services (fiber, cable and DSL) to the minimum standard of broadband speeds (100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload) to 60% or more of Speedtest users in their state grew dramatically from 22 states and the District of Columbia in the second half of 2024 to 38 states and the District of Columbia in the first half of 2025.
In addition, there are now five states—Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, North Dakota and Rhode Island —delivering speeds of 100/20 Mbps to more than 70% of their users.
Not only are broadband speeds improving, Speedtest data from the first half of 2025 also revealed that 33 states narrowed the gap between how many rural users vs. urban users were able to achieve the FCC’s minimum broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps.
This is a fairly dramatic turnaround from the second half of 2024 when Speedtest data showed that 32 states had increased their digital divide instead of decreasing it. Ookla uses the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification to determine which users are urban vs. rural.
South Dakota No. 1 in Starlink-delivered broadband speeds
As a result of NTIA’s June decision to allow other technologies such as LEO satellites to compete for BEAD funding, at least 32 states and territories have decided to include LEO satellite systems in their final proposals (not all final BEAD proposals have been submitted as some states received extensions). While many states are still prioritizing fiber, LEO services such as SpaceX’s Starlink and Amazon’s Kuiper are appearing in many of the revised proposals.
We looked at Speedtest data on SpaceX’s Starlink service in every state and the District of Columbia to see what percentage of Starlink users received the FCC’s minimum standard for broadband of 100/20 Mbps. South Dakota is the No. 1 state with 37.1% of Starlink users getting access to 100/20 Mbps speeds followed by Maine with 35.3% of users and Wyoming with 34.5% of users.
Download the full report
To find your state’s standing and how it compares to the rest of the country in broadband connectivity, download this free report here.
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.
Sue Marek is Ookla’s editorial director and part of the company’s analyst team. She oversees the company’s thought leadership and editorial content. Sue is a journalist with more than 30 years of experience covering the telecom industry and her work has appeared in Fierce Network, Light Reading, and SDxCentral. She is a frequent speaker at industry events and has moderated panels at Mobile World Las Vegas, Connect(x), the Consumer Electronics Show, the Competitive Carriers’ Show and 5G North America. Sue has a B.S. in journalism from the University of Colorado.
Experts agree that dedicated indoor cellular infrastructure is no longer a luxury, but a necessity.
Providing seamless connectivity in large venues such as transportation hubs, shopping centers and stadiums is becoming much more attainable as mobile network operators see a viable business case for providing this service to the thousands of users that pass through these venues every day.
But for smaller venues—retail outlets, hotel lobbies or sidewalk cafes—the return on the investment for the operator is not as clear. Nevertheless, wireless users expect their connectivity to be the same regardless of whether they are in a large stadium or walking the aisles of the local grocery store.
There is no one solution to solving the in-building coverage problem. However, the neutral host model is gaining traction because it offers a single shared and managed cellular infrastructure (either DAS or small cells or both) that support multiple mobile network operators simultaneously, replacing the need for separate infrastructure from each operator.
These issues and more were debated during the panel hosted by Ookla at the recent Mobile World Congress 2026 conference in Barcelona. Moderated by Karim Yaici, industry analyst at Ookla, the session featured Alberto Hernando, global head of densification at Cellnex; Mikael Lundman, CEO at Proptivity, and Mike Saperstein, senior vice president, government affairs and chief strategy officer at the Wireless Infrastructure Association (WIA).
Saperstein noted that the traditional in-building model where mobile operators have “footed the bill” is not viable with smaller buildings. But it’s also unclear if building owners are ready to make that investment.
“If I’m a building owner, does it make sense for me to invest in everything up-front?” Saperstein asked, noting that building owners are going to want to have some guarantee that what they purchase will not become outdated if the technology shifts.
However, Lundman noted that Proptivity, which is a neutral host provider that sells its solutions to building owners, thinks the business case for outfitting buildings with neutral host solutions is very strong, because building owners don’t want to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to build an office building only to find out their tenants can’t make phone calls in the building. “For building owners, it is very much up to you to make sure your customers in the building are happy,” he added.
Cellnex’s Hernando agreed, noting that tenants will lose productivity and retailers will lose sales without proper indoor coverage. However, he added that the right funding model depends on the vertical and the venue. Cellnex operates as an independent neutral host provider, acting as the “glue” between landlords and mobile network operators on a single shared infrastructure. It has deployed more than 1,000 in-building systems across Europe and works with all the major MNOs on-boarded.
From DAS to Small Cells
Not only is the business model for inbuilding still evolving, so is the technology. In-building solutions have migrated from repeaters to passive distributed antenna systems (DAS) and active DAS and now even includes small cells.
Hernando noted that the traditional DAS model does not translate easily to mid-size venues, where the cost remains a significant barrier.
But it is important to deploy in-building systems that will evolve as mobile traffic grows and use cases evolve. “This is not just about investing and providing a solution for 2026,” Hernando said. “We need to evolve the systems and provide good connectivity, not only for today but for the coming years.”
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.
Sue Marek is Ookla’s editorial director and part of the company’s analyst team. She oversees the company’s thought leadership and editorial content. Sue is a journalist with more than 30 years of experience covering the telecom industry and her work has appeared in Fierce Network, Light Reading, and SDxCentral. She is a frequent speaker at industry events and has moderated panels at Mobile World Las Vegas, Connect(x), the Consumer Electronics Show, the Competitive Carriers’ Show and 5G North America. Sue has a B.S. in journalism from the University of Colorado.
We studied the performance of 14 of the largest municipal networks from December 2024 through December 2025, and compared their performance to each other and to their ISP competitors.
Key Takeaways:
When compared to their broadband competitors, eight municipal providers in the U.S. that we monitored using Ookla Speedtest data beat their broadband competitors in median upload speeds and one municipal provider, Sherwood Broadband, outpaced the competition in median download speeds. We monitored a total of 14 municipal providers, however, one provider —EBP— did not have any competitors with enough test samples to compare its performance against.
Fort Collins, Colorado’s Connexion was the leader in median upload speed, delivering an average median upload speed of more than 300 Mbps for the entire 13-month period from December 2024 to December 2025.
Sherwood Broadband in Sherwood, Oregon, was the top provider in median download speeds, delivering an average median download speed that surpassed 400 Mbps eight months out of a 13-month period from December 2024 to December 2025.
UTOPIA Fiber in Utah is a standout in latency, delivering the lowest latency of all 14 municipal broadband providers with a multi-server latency consistently in the low 6 milliseconds (ms) to 8 ms range.
More than 700 communities across the U.S. are served by some type of municipal broadband network that provides its residents with internet services. In simple terms, a municipal broadband network is an internet service provider (ISP) that is owned and operated by the local city or county government or a municipal utility rather than a private company like Comcast or AT&T.
Using Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence® data, we studied the performance of 14 of the largest municipal networks from December 2024 through December 2025, and compared their performance against each other and to their ISP competitors in their market. It’s important to note that some Speedtest data may reflect the speeds of the users’ broadband price plans vs. the possible speeds that the provider can deliver.
We selected these 14 municipal providers because they are some of the largest in the U.S. based upon reported subscriber numbers and because we had the most test samples from these providers. Notably, EPB in Chattanooga, Tennessee, which is the largest municipal broadband provider in the U.S., did not have any competitors with enough test samples to compare its performance too.
However, these municipal networks are not evenly distributed around the country due to the disparities in state and local laws. For example, in Texas, Nebraska, and Missouri, municipalities are prohibited from selling telecom services directly to the public. And in Virginia and Louisiana a local referendum must be passed before a municipal network can be launched. These types of initiatives are often met with criticism from large ISPs that argue that municipal networks create “unfair competition” because cities don’t have to pay the same taxes or can subsidize losses with taxpayer money. In states where these arguments win over the legislature, community broadband initiatives are suppressed. However, some states, such as Colorado and Washington, have recently repealed state restrictions opening the door to more municipal broadband networks.
Connecting Cities: Four Models of Municipal Networks
For this report, we’ve categorized the municipal networks we studied into four groups:
Local Referendum: These are municipal networks that held local referendums to opt-out of restrictive state laws that initially prevented them from offering broadband or hold a vote as part of a requirement under state law. These include Connexion, NextLight and Pulse Fiber in Colorado; LFT Fiber in Lafayette, Louisiana; and Cedar Falls Utilities in Cedar Falls, Iowa. (LFT Fiber and Cedar Falls Utilities, while started by local referendums, are also ownednd operated by electric utilities so they fit into more than one category).
Owned and Operated by Electric Utilities: About half of the municipal networks in the U.S. are run by electric companies. These are municipal networks that were built and are operated as divisions of the existing municipal electric companies. BrightRidge in Johnson City, Tennessee; CDE Lightband in Clarksville, Tennessee; EPB Fiber in Chattanooga, Tennessee; NorthCentral Connect in Olive Branch, Mississippi; and OptiLink in Dalton, Georgia are examples of municipal networks operated by electric utilities.
Open Access Networks: These networks are built and maintained by the municipality but operate as wholesalers or shared resources. UTOPIA Fiber in Utah; and Sherwood Broadband in Sherwood, Oregon both act as shared resources with other ISPs or were built with the intention of being a shared resource.
Community-led: This category is for municipal networks that are operated as a department within the city. FairLawnGig in Fairlawn, Ohio and GreenLight Community Broadband both operate this way.
Muni-providers smash FCC’s minimum broadband standard
During the 13-month time frame from December 2024 to December 2025, four providers— Pulse Fiber, Connexion, BrightRidge, and Sherwood Broadband—consistently delivered the highest median download speeds. Sherwood Broadband registered median download speeds that surpassed 400 Mbps eight months out of the 13-month period while Pulse and Connexion logged speeds over 400 Mbps for two of the 13 months we analyzed.
LFT Fiber and Greenlight Community Broadband trailed the 14-provider field with median download speeds under 200 Mbps during eight of the 13 months we analyzed. However, those download speeds are still well above the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) minimum standard for broadband of 100 Mbps download speeds and 20 Mbps upload speeds.
Connexion was the top provider in median upload speed, delivering an average median upload speed of more than 300 Mbps for the entire time period. Pulse Fiber delivered median upload speeds of more than 300 Mbps for 10 of the 13 months and Sherwood delivered 300 Mbps or more median upload speeds for eight of the 13 months.
Upload speeds were an area where many municipal networks outshined their competitors. Eight municipal networks — Pulse Fiber, FairlawnGig, Connexion, Greenlight Community Broadband, Sherwood Broadband, OptiLink, Cedar Falls Utilities, and NextLight — all surpassed their broadband competitors in median upload speeds.
Network Performance of Municipal Broadband Providers
Municipal networks bypass legacy bottlenecks
Unlike their ISP competitors, municipal broadband networks typically are built using fiber optic technology and aren’t reliant on any legacy infrastructure such as copper phone lines or coaxial cable.
Onf the big benefits of having a fiber network is that they can deliver symmetrical upload and download speeds and avoid “bufferbloat” —a phenomenon that occurs when there’s a large amount of traffic that congests the connection. Cable networks often suffer from bufferbloat because they have asymmetrical speeds and slower upload speeds, often leading to higher latency during times of congestion. Because municipal networks use fiber networks with symmetrical speeds, they can avoid the bufferbloat problem.
Plus, municipal broadband networks are designed to provide broadband only to a specific community which means that the network’s central office or the heart of the network where all switching and routing occurs, is located in close proximity. This is different from a large regional or national network where traffic may need to be routed to distant regional hubs.
Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA) Fiber is a standout in latency because it consistently delivered a multi-server latency in the low 6 milliseconds (ms) to 8 ms range. This was the lowest latency of all 14 municipal broadband providers in nine of the 13 months we analyzed.
UTOPIA Fiber is different from some municipal providers because it’s an open access network that is funded by the Utah Infrastructure Agency. UTOPIA builds and maintains the network and hosts more than 15 competing ISPs that sell the service to the consumer.
Community networks started by local referendum
Cedar Falls Utilities (CFU)
Cedar Falls, Iowa
Background: In 1994 over 70% of Cedar Falls, Iowa, residents voted in favor of creating a municipal communications utility. This vote was a legal requirement under Iowa law for any city that wanted to establish or expand a municipal utility into the “communications” sector. Initially CFU deployed HFC for cable TV and later expanded into internet and phone service. In 2013 CFU completed a fiber project and deployed fiber to every single home and business in the city earning it the title of Iowa’s first “Gigabit City.” In 2020 CFU upgraded much of its equipment so it could offer 10-Gbps service and also used a $2.3 million state grant to expand its fiber network into rural areas outside the city limits.
Customers: 16,970 customersas of July 21, 2025. (2026 budget book)
Competitors: Mediacom is CFU’s main competitor. Mediacom, which uses the brand name Xtream, operates an HFC network that covers nearly 99% of the city. The company has been expanding its 2-Gbps service into more areas.
How CFU Performs in Cedar Falls, Iowa
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Cableco Mediacom’s median download speeds are higher than municipal provider CFU. For example, in December 2024 Mediacom recorded a median download speed of 407.38 Mbps compared to CFU, which had a median download speed of 281.56 Mbps. In December 2025 the gap had narrowed slightly with Mediacom recording a median download speed of 361.4 Mbps compared to CFU with a download speed of 311.64 Mbps.
However, because CFU is able to deliver more symmetrical speeds its median upload speeds are nearly 5x higher than Mediacom. CFU’s median upload speed in December 2025 was 247.55 Mbps compared to Mediacom which had a median upload speed of 49.99 Mbps.
CFU outshines Mediacom in median multi-server latency where it consistently delivers low latency between 14 ms to 15 ms, which is nearly one-third that of Mediacom which has a multi-server latency that is typically in the range of 40 ms to 43 ms.
Connexion
Fort Collins, CO
Background: Fort Collins initially applied for the Google Fiber challenge — a competition in which Google asked communities across the U.S. to apply to be the first location for its fiber service. More than 1,000 communities competed and Kansas City won the challenge. However, this sparked local interest for a city-owned alternative to the broadband services provided by national ISPs. To move forward Fort Collins residents had to approve a ballot measure allowing them to opt-out of a state law that restricted cities from offering internet services. A 2015 ballot measure was approved by voters followed by a $150 million bond measure to fund the building of the network. Construction of Connexion’s fiber network started in 2018 and the first customers were signed up in 2019. By the end of 2022 most of the network was complete.
Customers: 25,508 as of year-end 2025 (per annual report)
Competitors: Comcast’s Xfinity service is the primary competitor to Connexion and the cable company has been working to improve its upload speeds by performing mid-split upgrades to its nodes.
How Connexion Performs in Fort Collins, CO
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Xfinity’s median download speeds improved during the 13-month period from 257.29 Mbps in December 2024 to 341.4 Mbps in December 2025. Connexion’s median download speeds dropped slightly during that time period from 364.01 Mbps in December 2024 to 317.04 Mbps in December 2025.
Connexion, which is a fiber provider, outpaces Xfinity in median upload speeds (as noted above Connexion was the top municipal broadband provider in median upload speeds of the 14 providers we reviewed).
Cable providers have historically had low upload speeds compared to their fiber competitors because cable networks were originally designed to deliver one-way video traffic and not engineered for upload traffic. However, Xfinity has been upgrading its network with mid-split technology. While mid-split doesn’t allow Xfinity to deliver symmetrical speeds, it does allow customers to get higher upload speeds if they have the right modem.
During the 13-month period we see Xfinity’s median upload speeds increase more than 3x from 28.16 Mbps in December 2024 to 98.85 Mbps in December 2025. During the same time period, Connexion’s median upload speeds decreased from 325.6 Mbps in December 2024 to 246.96 Mbps in December 2025 but it is still able to outpace Xfinity in median upload speeds by a significant margin.
Multi-server latency is another area where you can see the gap between fiber and cable. Connexion’s multiserver latency is consistently in the single-digit range of 8 ms to 9 ms during the 13-month period while Xfinity’s multi-server latency is more than double that in the range of 22 ms to 24 ms.
LFT Fiber (formerly LUS Fiber)
Lafayette, LA
Background: Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) has provided electricity and water to the city of Lafayette, Louisiana for more than 125 years. In the late 1990s LUS built a fiber-optic ring to manage its electrical substations and in 2002 it started leasing surplus capacity to local schools and hospitals. The city soon realized that it could build its own fiber network for its citizens and in 2005 the city voted in favor of a $125 million bond initiative to fund a municipal fiber network. This move prompted some lawsuits from incumbent provider Cox Communications who argued that the city was using unfair financing. Nevertheless LUS Fiber’s network launched in 2009. During the height of the Covid-19 pandemic LUS Fiber partnered with the local school district and provided high-speed broadband to more than 10,000 students. LUS Fiber was recently rebranded to LFT Fiber to better reflect its expansion beyond Lafayette.
Competition: AT&T Fiber is currently LFT Fiber’s biggest rival. The company started rapidly expanding its fiber footprint in Lafayette in 2017 and launched gigabit speeds to residents. In 2022 AT&T upgraded its network and started offering multi-gigabit speeds such as 2 Gbps and 5 Gbps, Most recently the company expanded its fiber footprint around Lafayette to surrounding areas where LFT Fiber is also growing its footprint.
How LFT Fiber Performs in Lafayette, LA
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
According to Ookla Speedtest data AT&T outperforms LFT Fiber by a large margin in both median download and upload speeds. The speed gap between the two appears to be growing. In December 2024 AT&T had a median download speed of 350.59 Mbps, which is a little more than 2x that of LUS Fiber at 170.51 Mbps. But by December 2025 that gap had grown to more than 4x with AT&T logging a median download speed of 473.80 Mbps compared to LFT Fiber at 112.90 Mbps.
The gap in median upload speeds also increased from December 2024 when AT&T had a median download speed of 327.54 Mbps compared to LFT Fiber at 94.25 Mbps and December 2025 when AT&T had a median download speed of 424.17 Mbps compared to LUS Fiber at 107.70 Mbps.
Median multi-server latency is one area where LFT Fiber had been outpacing AT&T at least until December 2025 when things appear to shift. LFT Fiber had a median multi-server latency of just 24 ms in December 2024 but it suddenly increased to 42 ms in December 2025, shooting higher than AT&T Fiber which has consistently had a latency in the range of 36 ms to 39 ms during the entire 13 months.
LUS Fiber’s increase in latency may be due to the number of users that are on older Wi-Fi routers. Although the company has started rolling out newer Wi-Fi 7 gateways, many of its existing customers are reliant upon older generations of access points.
NextLight
Longmont, CO
Background: NextLight is a city-owned fiber network that got its start in the late 1990s when Longmont constructed a 17-mile fiber-optic loop to connect city buildings. Today the network covers about more than 90% of the city. However, Longmont faced a major hurdle with its fiber network in 2005 when the Colorado Legislature passed Senate Bill 152 which prohibited local governments from providing telecom services unless the voters voted to opt out. In 2009 Longmont held a referendum asking voters to allow the city to bypass SB 152 but lost. The town tried again two years later and it passed with 60% voter approval. In 2013 Longmont voters approved a $45.3 million bond to fund the expansion of the fiber network throughout the city.
Customers: 29,000 residential and business customers (2026 budget)
Competition: NextLight’s largest competitor is Xfinity, which is operated by Comcast. The cable provider covers about 97% of the city and aggressively offers bundled plans with mobile service and TV.
How NextLight Performs in Longmont, CO
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Both Xfinity and NextLight consistently delivered median download speeds in the 300 Mbps+ range during the 13-month period with Xfinity logging a median download speed of 361.03 Mbps in December 2024 compared to NextLight with a download speed of 308.02 Mbps. In December 2025 the two broadband providers’ speeds were nearly on par with Xfinity delivering median download speeds of 341.93 Mbps compared to NextLight with 331.01 Mbps.
However, when it comes to upload speeds NextLight benefits from fiber’s symmetric speeds and outperforms Xfinity by a large margin. During the 13-month period NextLight’s median upload speeds range from 279.23 Mbps in December 2024, peaking at 306.83 Mbps in March 2025 and ending at 297.86 Mbps in December 2025.
Xfinity, meanwhile, hindered by coaxial cable’s technology roots as a one-way video distribution system, increased its upload speeds more than 69% during the 13-month time period. However, it still failed to match NextLight’s upload speeds. Xfinity delivered median upload speeds ranging from 23.64 Mbps in December 2024 to 40.17 Mbps in December 2025.
Among the other municipal broadband providers, NextLight is a standout in latency, consistently delivering single-digit multi-server latency of either 7 ms or 8 ms. That means NextLight customers will experience nearly instantaneous network responsiveness.
Xfinity users also experience very consistent and fairly low latency in the 19 ms to 22 ms range but it’s more than double that of NextLight.
Pulse Fiber
Loveland, CO
Background: Similar to Fort Collins and Longmont, Colorado, the City of Loveland first had to hold a referendum in 2015 to opt-out of Senate Bill 152 so it could offer telecom services to its residents. That measure passed with the approval of 82% of voters and Pulse was created in 2018 as a division of the city’s water and power department. Construction started in November 2019 and was funded through a $95 million utility bond. The network was completed in November 2023 and is now expanding to neighboring areas, including the town of Timnath.
Customers: 15,000-20,000 (estimated based upon 32% take rate)
Competition: Pulse’s main competitor is Comcast’s Xfinity service which is still primarily a hybrid-fiber coax network. However, Xfinity has been rolling out DOCSIS 4.0 in Loveland, which will allow them to offer higher upload speeds.
How Pulse Fiber Performs in Loveland, CO
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Pulse and Xfinity are fairly neck-and-neck with both delivering median download speeds in the range of 300-400 Mbps. Xfinity had a median download speed of 301.46 Mbps in December 2024 increasing to 404.27 Mbps in December 2025. Pulse logged a median download speed slightly higher than Xfinity of 328.65 Mbps in December 2024 which increased to 389.42 Mbps in December 2025.
Once again fiber shines in upload speeds with Pulse Fiber clocking a median upload speed of 271.09 Mbps in December 2025 and climbing to 314.46 Mbps in December 2025.
Although Xfinity did increase its median upload speeds 77.5% during the 13-month period from 44.98 Mbps in December 2024 to 79.83 Mbps in December 2025, it’s still far below its fiber competitor.
Pulse also shines compared to Xfinity in median multi-server latency. The muni-fiber provider has a low single digit latency of just 8 ms to 9 ms, which means its users will experience superior response times. This is compared to Xfinity with a median multi-server latency ranging from 22 ms to 24 ms over the 13-months time frame.
Municipal networks owned and operated by electric utilities
BrightRidge
Johnson City, TN
Background: BrightRidge Broadband evolved out of Johnson City Power Board, the local legacy utility company. In 2017 Johnson City Power Board transitioned into an independent energy authority and rebranded as BrightRidge. BrightRidge started a broadband division in late 2018 and launched a $64 million, eight-year initiative to combat the region’s digital divide by deploying a fiber and fixed wireless network.
Customers: The company now has more than 53,500 fiber locations. It served 20,972 customers as of fiscal year 2025. (annual report)
Competitors: BrightRidge’s primary broadband competitor in the Johnson City market is Brightspeed Fiber and Spectrum. Brightspeed was formed in 2021 by private equity firm Apollo Global Management. Brightspeed purchased the DSL assets of Lumen Technologies and has been upgrading many of those DSL assets to fiber. In Johnson City, Brightspeed has deployed fiber to approximately 26,500 locations, representing about 64% of their local footprint. The company offers symmetrical speed plans ranging from 200 Mbps to 2 Gbps. Spectrum, which is owned by Charter Communications, offers broadband services in Johnson City using hybrid fiber coax. The company has a $5.5 billion network evolution project that it is rolling out nationwide to improve its upload speeds and network latency through the use of high splits and DOCSIS 4.0.
How BrightRidge Broadband Performs in Johnson City, TN
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
According to Speedtest data, BrightRidge’s median download speeds increased from 229.88 Mbps in December 2024 to 397.02 Mbps in December 2025 and its median upload speeds increased from 252.86 Mbps to 288.75 Mbps during that same 13-month period. However, Brightspeed topped BrightRidge with a median download speed of 459.55 Mbps in January 2025 increasing to 504.77 Mbps in December 2025. Spectrum’s median download speeds were 313.12 Mbps in December 2024 increasing to 410.44 Mbps in December 2025.
BrightRidge also trails Brightspeed in median upload speeds, with BrightRidge having a median upload speed of 288.75 Mbps in December 2025 compared to Brightspeed’s median download speed of 371.67 Mbps. However, both fiber providers are significantly higher than cable provider Spectrum, which has a median upload speed of just 22.72 Mbps in December 2025.
BrightRidge and Brightspeed have fairly similar multi-server latency profiles, which is the measurement of the network’s responsiveness with a lower number equating to less delay. Both companies had a latency ranging from 28 ms to 30 ms. However, Spectrum’s latency is a bit higher in the range of 34 ms to 50 ms.
CDE Lightband
Clarksville, TN
Background: CDE Lightband was formed by the municipal power provider, Clarksville Department of Electricity (CDE), when the city’s electrical grid needed an upgrade. In 2007 the city passed a referendum to allow CDE to expand its services and build a fiber network so it could better monitor its grid. In 2008 the CDE launched its broadband unit to sell high-speed internet services.
Customers: 30,482 broadband subscribers as of fiscal year 2024-2025 (annual report)
Competitors: AT&T Fiber is CDE’s primary competitor in Clarksville. The company has aggressively expanded its fiber footprint in the area and offers speed tiers ranging from 300 Mbps up to 5 Gbps.
How CDE Lightband Performs in Clarksville, TN
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
According to Speedtest data, AT&T Fiber’s median download speeds are nearly double that of CDE Lightband. In December 2025 AT&T’s Fiber’s median download speed was 423.36 Mbps compared to CDE at 205.88 Mbps. There’s also a big gap in median upload speeds with AT&T having a median upload speed of 315.4 Mbps in December 2025 compared to CDE with a median upload speed of 205.45 Mbps.
In median multi-server latency CDE initially was lower than AT&T with multi-server latency of just 11 ms in December 2024 however that latency increased over the year to 23 ms in December 2025. AT&T Fiber, meanwhile, recorded a fairly consistent multi-server latency ranging from 21 ms to 23 ms during the 13-month time period.
Electric Power Board (EPB) Fiber
Chattanooga, TN
Background: Electric Power Board of Chattanooga (EPB) is a municipally-owned utility. In the late 2000s EPB decided to modernize its aging electric infrastructure to reduce power outages and built a fiber optic backbone to reroute power and prevent outages. A secondary benefit to this fiber network was that EBP could deliver high speed internet to homes and businesses. EPB launched its first fiber-to-the-home services in 2009 and became the first operator to offer 1 Gbps services to the entire community. In 2015 EPB launched a 10-Gbps service and in 2022 it launched a 25 Gbps service.
Competition: EPB is the dominant player in the market. While AT&T Fiber is expanding in Chattanooga, Speedtest Intelligence doesn’t have enough samples of AT&T’s network to compare its performance to EPB. Xfinity also offers cable service to a portion of the city but not enough samples were available to provide an accurate comparison.
How EPB Fiber Performs in Chattanooga, TN
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
EPB’s median download speeds fluctuated over the 13-month period from 193.35 Mbps in December 2024 to 176.45 Mbps in December 2025 but its median upload speeds have improved during that time period. In December 2024 EPB recorded a median upload speed of 102.77 Mbps which climbed to 158.79 Mbps in December 2025. The muni-broadband provider had fairly steady multi-server latency of between 8 ms to 12 ms.
Northcentral Connect
Olive Branch, Mississippi
Background: Northcentral Connect is the fiber subsidiary of Northcentral Electric Cooperative (NEC), a member-owned utility company. For decades Mississippi law restricted electric cooperatives from providing telecom services but that changed in 2019 with the passage of the Mississippi Broadband Enabling Act. Northcentral Electric created Northcentral Connect in February 2020 because of demand from members who wanted reliable internet but were having difficulty finding good options. Northcentral Electric was already installing fiber between their substations to modernize their electric grid so the utility created Northcentral Connect and expanded that fiber to DeSoto and Marshall counties and it is still expanding today.
Customers: Northcentral Connect hasn’t reported subscriber numbers but says it has passed more than 18,000 homes with fiber. (annual report)
Competition: Northcentral Connect competes with Mississippi-based regional provider C Spire Fiber. C Spire is aggressively expanding fiber in DeSoto County and other areas where Northcentral also provides services.
How Northcentral Connect Performs in Olive Branch, MS
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Northcentral falls below Cspire in median download speed. The muni-broadband provider logged median download speeds of 306.02 Mbps in December 2024 and 320.30 Mbps in December 2025. Cspire, however, eclipsed Northcentral with download speeds starting at 386.26 Mbps in January 2024 and rising to 442.42 Mbps in December 2025.
A similar pattern occurs in upload speeds with Cspire at the top with median upload speeds in the high 200s and low 300s. In December 2025 its users experienced median upload speeds of 312.16 Mbps. Northcentral is below Cspire with median upload speeds of 282.23 Mbps in December 2025.
Latency is one metric where Northcentral shines. Northcentral’s median multi-server latency starts as 31 ms in December 2024 and stays primarily in the 28 ms to 32 ms range except for two instances in February 2025 and December 2025 when its latency moves up to 37 ms. CSpire’s median multi-server latency trends slightly higher than Northcentral with a multi-server latency of 42 ms in December 2024 and finishing at 33 ms in December 2025.
OptiLink
Dalton, Georgia
Background: OptiLink is the telecom branch of Dalton Utilities in Dalton, Georgia, which is home to several massive carpet mills. In the late 1990s Dalton Utilities started building a fiber backbone to manage its electric and water systems. The city’s carpet mills needed high-speed broadband to stay competitive so Dalton Utilities launched OptiLink to provide fiber to homes and businesses in the city. In 2019 OptiLink became the first municipal network in Georgia to offer 1 Gbps speeds to residents. Later that year OptiLink launched a 10-Gbps residential service.
Competition: OptiLink’s rivals in Dalton, Georgia are Spectrum, owned by Charter Communications, and Kinetic by Uniti. Spectrum covers more than 88% of Dalton and offers bundles that include wireless and television services. Kinetic is a regional provider that offers a mix of DSL and fiber.
How OptiLink Performs in Dalton, GA
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Spectrum outperforms OptiLink and Kinetic in median download speeds. Spectrum clocked a median download speed of 345.95 Mbps in December 2024 and speeds ebbed and flowed over the 13 months rising to 368.80 Mbps in December 2025. OptiLink’s median download speeds were lower than Spectrum starting at 272.64 Mbps in December 2024 and rising to 298.71 Mbps in December 2025.
Because Kinetic by Uniti operates a hybrid of DSL and fiber in its neighborhoods, its median download speeds fall far below the other two providers for most of the 13-month time frame but speeds start to dramatically climb in October 2025 with the company having a median download speed of 269.46 Mbps in December 2025. This was likely the result of Kinetic’s rollout of XGS-PON technology across more of its footprint as well as its partnership with Amazon’s eero, which included certifying every home with Wi-Fi 7 coverage. This was a direct attempt by Uniti to combat its reputation for delivering painfully slow internet service.
Not surprisingly, the competitive tables turn when measuring median upload speeds. Municipal fiber provider OptiLink delivers much higher median upload speeds than its competitors with speeds of 231.07 Mbps in December 2024 and ending with speeds of 252.09 Mbps in December 2025.
Spectrum, meanwhile, impeded by coaxial cable’s poor uplink capacity, stays in third place with median upload speeds in the low-to-mid 20 Mbps range.
Once again, we see the results of Kinetic by Uniti’s expansion of XGS-PON technology and its partnership with Amazon’s eero and the conversion to Wi-Fi 7. Kinetic by Uniti’s median upload speeds grew dramatically from 25.22 Mbps in December 2024 to 269.46 Mbps in December 2025.
Kinetic by Uniti also scores in median multi-server latency with a consistently low latency ranging from 11 ms to 14 ms. OptiLink’s median multi-server latency improves over the 13-month time frame, starting at 23 ms and dropping to 14 ms in December 2025. Spectrum has the highest multi-server latency of the three, ranging from 31 ms in December 2024 to 33 ms in December 2025.
Open access networks
Sherwood Broadband
Sherwood, Oregon
Background: Sherwood Broadband is a municipal fiber utility operated by the City of Sherwood. It got its start in late 2003 when the Sherwood Urban Renewal Agency purchased fiber for the city’s Old Town district to create a direct link to a data center in Portland for faster internet access. The city council then created the Sherwood Broadband utility in 2004. Initially Sherwood Broadband was focused on connecting city buildings and schools. It also initially operated as an open access network with the city providing the infrastructure and a partner providing the actual internet. Sherwood continues to maintain this capability for commercial and carrier-grade customers but now sells services directly to residential customers. In 2019 Sherwood Broadband decided to expand into residential areas and launched a fiber pilot project in 10 neighborhoods where conduit was already in place. In 2021 the municipality decided to launch a full rollout and the city council approved $20 million in revenue bonds to fund the expansion. Now the utility has secured more funding and plans to extend its fiber footprint to surrounding rural areas.
Competition: Like many municipal broadband providers, Sherwood faces competition from cable operator Xfinity, which is owned by Comcast. But it also has a fiber rival —Ziply Fiber —that offers symmetrical speeds.
How Sherwood Broadband Performs in Sherwood, OR
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Sherwood outpaces its competitors in median download speed with speeds ranging from the high 300 Mbps to the 400 Mbps. Sherwood has a median download speed of 390.95 Mbps in December 2024 and a median download speed of 399.41 Mbps in December 2025, which is higher than Xfinity with a median download speed of 272.36 Mbps in December 2024 and a median download speed of 376.68 Mbps. Ziply falls into third place with a median download speed of 226.79 Mbps in December 2024 and just 201.13 Mbps in December 2025.
Sherwood also comfortably outpaces both competitors in median upload speeds during the 13-month period with an upload speed of 291.06 Mbps in December 2024 and an upload speed of 296.59 Mbps in December 2025. Fellow fiber provider Ziply outperforms cableco Xfinity with median upload speeds starting at 214.56 Mbps in December 2024 and ending with upload speeds of 241.88 Mbps in December 2025.
Despite nearly doubling its median upload speeds from 23.72 Mbps in December 2024 to 41.45 Mbps in December 2025, Xfinity falls way below its fiber foes.
Sherwood Broadband also outpaces its peers by clocking in with low single-digit median multi-server latency in the range of 7 ms to 8 ms. Ziply Fiber also has very low median multi-server latency in the 9 ms to 10 ms range. Both fiber providers are far below Xfinity’s latency which is in the 23 ms to 25 ms range.
UTOPIA Fiber
Utah
Background: Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency (UTOPIA) Fiber is unique to this list because it’s an open access fiber optic network with more than 15 private ISPs operating on its network. UTOPIA was created in 2002 by eleven Utah cities. Those cities issued bonds to pay for the construction of the network, pledging their own sales tax revenue as collateral so if the network didn’t make enough money the cities had to cover the losses with their tax dollars. This model struggled and by 2008 the number of people signing up for service from UTOPIA was lagging and UTOPIA had to stop building its network.
In 2010 nine of the former 11 cities created the Utah Infrastructure Agency to address the flaws in the original UTOPIA business model. Unlike UTOPIA, which deployed a bunch of fiber and waited for people to sign up, the Utah Infrastructure Agency uses its funds to build specifically in areas where there is demand.
Customers: 70,000 subscribers as of year-end 2024 (release)
Competition: Because UTOPIA is an open access network in multiple Utah cities, it encounters several competitors. GFiber, formerly known as Google Fiber, is probably its largest foe. GFiber has a large presence in Salt Lake City and Provo and has been expanding into smaller cities in Utah. It also competes with Comcast’s Xfinity and TDS Telecom.
How UTOPIA Performs in Utah
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
GFiber outshines all the other providers in median download and upload speed. The company entered the Provo, Utah market in 2013 when it acquired iProvo, the city-owned fiber network and immediately upgraded it to gigabit speeds and provided free basic service to every home on the network for seven years. It later expanded to Salt Lake City in 2016. The company offers a variety of plans from 1-Gbps service all the way up to 8-Gbps service.
According to Speedtest data GFiber is consistently delivering median download speeds in the 400 Mbps range from 425.63 Mbps in December 2024 to 485.02 Mbps in December 2025.
UTOPIA Fiber falls below GFiber, cable provider Xfinity and TDS Telecom. TDS is a cable provider in southern Utah. Although TDS has been deploying some fiber in Utah, its speeds are more consistent with that of a cable provider because of its low median upload speeds and higher median multi-server latency.
UTOPIA, while lower than the competition in median download speeds, is consistently delivering speeds in the 200 Mbps range with 233.16 Mbps in December 2024 and 264.57 Mbps in December 2025.
GFiber leads the competition in median upload speeds with speeds from 320.75 Mbps in December 2024 to 356.76 Mbps in December 2025.
UTOPIA outpaces the cable competitors by delivering median upload speeds from 215.53 Mbps in December 2024 to 228.07 Mbps in December 2025.
GFiber also outpaces the competition in median multi-server latency by consistently delivering 4 ms of latency, which means its users will experience no noticeable delays. UTOPIA also outpaces Xfinity and TDS from December 2024 until July 2025 with a latency of just 6 ms. However, in August its latency increased to 7 ms and then again to 8 ms in September. Meanwhile TDS consistently delivered latency in the 8 ms to 9 ms range and Xfinity delivered a median multi-server latency in the 11 ms to 12 ms. range.
Community-led municipal networks
FairlawnGig
Fairlawn, OH
Background: FairlawnGig was created by the city of Fairlawn, Ohio, in 2016 with the goal of delivering better broadband speeds to the community as well as attracting more businesses to the area. The city financed the project with a $10 million bond and partnered with Fujitsu to be its network integrator. Construction started in 2016 and involved burying 55 miles of fiber optic cable. The network became operational later that year and reached every home and business within city limits by mid-2017. It later expanded to neighboring communities like Akron and Tallmadge.
Subscribers: FairlawnGig doesn’t report subscriber numbers but says it has a 60% take rate in an area with a population of about 7,500.
Competition: FairLawnGig’s primary competitor is Spectrum, which is owned by Charter Communications, and offers broadband services using hybrid fiber coax. The company has a $5.5 billion network evolution project that it is rolling out nationwide to improve its upload speeds and network latency through the use of high splits and DOCSIS 4.0.
How FairlawnGig Performs in Akron, OH
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
Speedtest data shows that FairlawnGig’s median download speeds increased 18.11% from December 2024 when it had a median download speed of 284.84 Mbps to 336.43 Mbps in December 2025. Spectrum also increased its median download speeds over that time period 14.14% from 316.65 Mbps to 361.42 Mbps.
While FairlawnGig and Spectrum have comparable median download speeds, upload speeds are another story. FairlawnGig has much higher median upload speeds than Spectrum. In December 2025 Fairlawn’s median upload speed of 236.61 Mbps was 90.48% higher than Spectrum’s upload speed of 22.52 Mbps.
Median multi-server latency is another big differentiator between FairlawnGig and Spectrum. FairlawnGig’s multi-server latency of 25 ms in December 2025 is 40% lower than Spectrum’s multi-server latency of 35 ms.
Greenlight Municipal Broadband
Wilson, NC
Background: The city of Wilson, North Carolina decided to build its own fiber network after failing to get private ISPs to upgrade their broadband infrastructure. In November 2006, the Wilson City Council voted unanimously to build their own network. Instead of using taxpayer money, they issued $28 million in bonds, intended to be paid back by the revenue from the service itself. In May 2008, the city officially launched service using the Greenlight moniker. In July 2013 it became the first city in North Carolina to offer 1 GPS service to every home and business in the community.
Competition: Spectrum, which is owned by Charter Communications, is Greenlight’s most significant competitor. Spectrum has invested heavily in its network in Wilson to try to match Greenlight’s offerings.
How Greenlight Fiber Performs in Wilson, NC
Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® | December 2024 – December 2025
According to Speedtest Intelligence data Spectrum outshines Greenlight when it comes to median download speeds. But Greenlight greatly outperforms Spectrum in median upload speeds and in median multi-server latency.
Muni-broadband deliver competitive offerings
Our review of 13-months of data in markets with municipal broadband providers shows that not only are these providers offering a valuable service to their residents, they also are often outperforming the national ISPs in upload speeds and latency.
By leveraging fiber technology and prioritizing community-specific needs, municipal networks like Fort Collins’ Connexion and Sherwood Broadband are delivering speeds that outperform their competitors in the market.
While traditional cable providers are making strides with network upgrades like mid-split technology to improve upload performance, they still largely trail the symmetrical speeds and low-latency profiles inherent to the “greenfield” fiber networks built by municipalities.
To find out more about Speedtest Intelligence® data and insights, visit our website.
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.
Sue Marek is Ookla’s editorial director and part of the company’s analyst team. She oversees the company’s thought leadership and editorial content. Sue is a journalist with more than 30 years of experience covering the telecom industry and her work has appeared in Fierce Network, Light Reading, and SDxCentral. She is a frequent speaker at industry events and has moderated panels at Mobile World Las Vegas, Connect(x), the Consumer Electronics Show, the Competitive Carriers’ Show and 5G North America. Sue has a B.S. in journalism from the University of Colorado.
A year on from our inaugural report, the global 5G SA narrative in 2026 has shifted from a coverage race to a capability contest. The GCC now delivers median download speeds five times those in Europe, while the U.S. has completed its Tier-1 SA launches. Europe is accelerating, but from a low base, and the gap with global leaders risks widening as 5G Advanced scales elsewhere.
The second edition of Ookla and Omdia’s flagship report on the global state of 5G Standalone confirms that the technology has moved beyond launch announcements into an execution-driven phase. By the close of 2025, the “coverage gap” between major economic blocs had narrowed, but a more consequential “capability gap” has emerged, reflecting divergent spectrum strategies, investment depth, and the extent to which operators have moved beyond baseline SA deployment toward end-to-end network optimization.
Globally, 5G SA availability based on Speedtest® sample share reached 17.6% in Q4 2025, up modestly from 16.2% a year earlier, indicating that roughly one in six 5G Speedtests worldwide now occurs on a standalone network. The headline global median SA download speed of 269.51 Mbps represents a 52% premium over non-standalone networks, though this figure masks significant regional variation driven by spectrum allocation depth, carrier aggregation maturity, and user-plane engineering.
For governments and regulators, the stakes of the SA transition have intensified. National competitiveness, digital sovereignty, and AI readiness have converged to reshape investment priorities across major markets. The European Commission’s Digital Networks Act, the U.S.’ supply chain diversification program, and China’s integration of 5G Advanced into its 15th Five-Year Plan all signal that 5G SA is now treated as foundational national infrastructure central to AI ambitions, and not merely a connectivity upgrade.
This year’s report significantly expands the scope of the analysis. For the first time, our research examines 5G SA’s impact on end-user battery life and voice performance (VoNR), quality of experience (QoE) metrics to cloud and gaming infrastructure, and the first wave of commercial monetization strategies spanning consumer network slicing, enterprise SLAs, and 5G Advanced segmentation. We also provide an assessment of the geopolitical context now shaping SA’s evolution, from Europe’s Digital Networks Act to the GCC’s sovereign AI infrastructure strategies.
Key Takeaways:
The GCC has established itself as the global 5G SA performance leader, with the UAE setting the speed benchmark
Led by e& and du’s aggressive 5G Advanced deployments, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) delivered the world’s fastest 5G SA median download speeds in Q4 2025 at 1.13 Gbps, nearly five times that of Europe. The UAE alone reached a median of 1.24 Gbps on SA networks, a speed that would be considered exceptional even for full-fiber broadband in developed markets. The deployment of four-carrier aggregation and enhanced MIMO technology, coupled with the strategic allocation of premium mid-band spectrum to the SA network, demonstrates the performance ceiling that a fully realized 5G SA architecture can achieve.
South Korea followed at 767 Mbps, driven by wide 3.5 GHz channel bandwidth, with the U.S. at 404 Mbps following the completion of nationwide SA deployments by all three Tier-1 operators. Europe, at 205 Mbps, trails all developed regions, though the region’s SA networks still deliver a 45% download speed premium over NSA, confirming the performance value of the SA transition where material spectrum depth is allocated.
Europe’s 5G SA gap with global peers is narrowing, but the region still trails North America by 27 percentage points
Europe’s 5G SA sample share more than doubled from 1.1% to 2.8% between Q4 2024 and Q4 2025, driven by accelerated deployments in Austria (8.7%), Spain (8.3%), the United Kingdom (7.0%), and France (5.9%). These four markets now account for the vast majority of European SA connections. The United Kingdom and France registered the strongest year-on-year acceleration in Europe, each gaining 5.3 percentage points, reflecting the impact of investment-linked merger conditions and competition in the United Kingdom, as well as targeted R&D policy support in France.
U.S. Widens 5G SA Lead Over Europe & Gulf
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q1 2023 – Q4 2025
However, the region still trails North America by 27 percentage points and emerging Asia by 30. At the global level, the U.S. remains the largest accelerator in absolute terms over the last year, with SA sample share rising 8.2 percentage points to 31.6% year-on-year, driven by the sequential rollout of SA across all Tier-1 operators beyond T-Mobile. Firmware fragmentation, where handset OEMs gatekeep SA network access pending individual carrier certification, and tariff structures that fail to incentivize migration from NSA, remain the primary barriers to faster European adoption.
5G SA delivers measurable performance and quality of experience gains, but end-to-end optimization separates leaders from laggards
Globally, SA connections delivered a 52% download speed premium (mostly an artifact of rich spectrum allocation and lower network load) and improved median multi-server latency by over 6% compared to NSA. However, this year’s report finds that a standalone core migration alone does not guarantee a better end-user experience. Quality of experience analysis reveals a nuanced picture: SA improves video and cloud infrastructure latency in Europe versus NSA, but underperforms NSA for gaming latency within the same region. North America records the lowest absolute SA cloud and gaming latency, consistent with dense hyperscaler adjacency and mature interconnect ecosystems.
Among European markets, France (41 ms to cloud endpoints), Austria (48 ms), and Finland (50 ms) demonstrate what is achievable where backbone quality, peering density, and routing discipline are strong. These outcomes reflect an underappreciated end-to-end network stack optimization dividend, encompassing data-center proximity, fiber backhaul depth, and user-plane topology, rather than a pure “SA dividend” alone.
The report also presents early evidence of a tangible consumer benefit of SA: battery life. In the UK, devices on EE’s 5G SA network recorded median discharge times approximately 22% longer than those on NSA, with O2 showing an 11% advantage. These gains likely stem from features like SA’s unified control plane, which eliminates the dual-connectivity overhead of NSA configurations.
Core network investment is accelerating as monetization transitions from concept to selective execution
Omdia’s latest forecasts confirm the industry’s shift toward software-defined core capability as the primary driver of next-cycle investment. Global 5G core software spending is projected to grow at an 8.8% CAGR between 2025 and 2030, with EMEA leading at 16.7%, significantly outpacing North America (5.5%) and Asia & Oceania (4.2%). This reflects EMEA’s later position in the deployment cycle, as the region is entering its period of peak 5G core adoption, while North America’s core spending trajectory is expected to have peaked in 2025 following the commercial launches by AT&T and Verizon. By end of Q3 2025, 83 operators worldwide had deployed 5G core networks, with 5G core investment accounting for 63.6% of global core network function software spending.
5G Core Investment Accelerates Across Regions
Omdia | 2023-2030
On monetization, consumer strategies now span speed tiers (primarily Europe), network slicing (Singapore, France, and the U.S.), and 5G Advanced segmentation packages (China). Enterprise slicing presents the much larger long-term revenue opportunity, with T-Mobile’s SuperMobile representing the first nationwide commercial B2B slicing service in the U.S. Countries with coordinated regulatory frameworks, implementing clear coverage obligations, investment incentives, or infrastructure consolidation policies with deployment remedies, consistently outperform those with fragmented or reactive approaches, reinforcing the report’s finding that policy has emerged as a primary competitive differentiator in 5G SA outcomes globally.
Download the full report
For the comprehensive analysis of 5G SA and 5G Advanced deployment, performance, and monetization across global markets, including new research on battery life, voice performance, quality of experience, geopolitical context, and expanded policy case studies from the UK, France, Brazil, Japan, and the UAE, download the full report, 5G Standalone and 5G Advanced: A Global Reality Check on 5G SA and 5G Advanced in 2026.
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.
Luke Kehoe leads Ookla’s research and thought leadership efforts in Europe.
An electronic engineering alumnus of University College Dublin, Luke has extensive experience collaborating with mobile operators, telecoms vendors, and government agencies in research and advisory roles across Europe. He has contributed to internationally recognised thought leadership publications in areas such as 5G, IoT, open RAN, and edge computing, working with prestigious organisations like the Telecom Infra Project and the World Economic Forum.
This year, the conversations at Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2026 in Barcelona shifted dramatically. While previous years focused heavily on intrinsic challenges for the telecom sector—the need for 5G monetization, the untapped enterprise opportunity, the calls for “fair share”, and the need for network consolidation—this year’s show focused more on upside. The show floor and our discussions were dominated by opportunities around topics such as satellite, sovereignty, amidst the emerging age of AI, and with a view towards the arrival of 6G. Following the event, our Ookla Research analysts—Mike Dano, Mark Giles, Luke Kehoe, and Karim Yaici—sat down to cut through the noise.
The mainstreaming of satellite and NTN
Satellite connectivity and Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) have officially moved from a niche talking point to a core architectural consideration.
Key announcements:
Starlink’s Next-Gen Push: Starlink held a massive keynote to announce its second-generation satellite constellation for direct-to-device (D2D), slated to begin offering services in 2028. Deutsche Telekom was announced as their first official customer for this new constellation. The introduction of the “Starlink Mobile” brand looks to be an important but still early stepping stone in a journey toward a more fully-fledged mobile service.
The AST SpaceMobile Counter: AST SpaceMobile continues to make a huge amount of noise, bolstered by a major pre-MWC announcement regarding their deepening partnership and joint venture with Vodafone through Satellite Connect Europe
Our take: Low-Earth-orbit (LEO)-based D2D satellite connectivity is graduating from a novelty feature for hikers into a standard “resilience layer” for mass-market mobile networks. The super-bundle of the future will integrate fiber, cellular, and satellite into a single service that automatically fails over when one link drops. What we are witnessing is a massive race to conquer space.
On one side, you have the operator-backed AST SpaceMobile, which operates without a consumer-facing brand and continues to face delays in constellation buildout. On the other, you have Starlink, which has been incredibly strategic about exposing its brand everywhere,from airline Wi-Fi to fixed broadband, and now mobile. The big question moving forward is whether Starlink’s D2D offering stays at that or is just a stepping stone toward a much more capable, hybrid space-terrestrial mobile offering in the future.
5G-Advanced, 5G Standalone, and the 6G horizon
The industry is balancing the need to monetize existing 5G investments with the architectural groundwork required for 6G.
Key announcements:
5G slice validation: Ookla showcased its own collaboration at the event: an industry-first methodology for testing 5G network slices, co-developed with Ericsson. This specialized proof of concept in the Speedtest app enables real-time validation of differentiated 5G connectivity for ultra-low latency and mission-critical reliability (think slices optimized for gaming or video conferencing).
6G timelines: SoftBank laid down a marker, stating they expect to deliver initial 6G services in 2029, emphasizing the need for massive 400 MHz bands to operate effectively.
AI-RAN commercialization: Nokia executives promised commercial AI-RAN deployments (in collaboration with Nvidia) by 2027, bridging the gap between 5G-Advanced and 6G.
Our take: 5G Standalone (SA) was frequently mentioned as a prerequisite and stepping stone to 6G networks. While our data, released just before MWC, shows huge variation in 5G SA adoption globally, it’s clear that leading operators are leaning into the technology, to launch new services and drive competitive advantage.
When it comes to 6G, the technical momentum is real, but it is tempered by economic caution. Many European operators remain hesitant about undertaking another massive capital expenditure so soon. However, the U.S. likely targeting the 2028 Olympics for early pre-commercial 6G deployment creates a global race dynamic, with rival markets and even operators within the U.S., forced to respond.
Digital sovereignty across the stack
The need for secure, localized telecom and cloud infrastructure is set to become a defining procurement criterion for enterprises and the public sector, especially in Europe. There is now a rigid demand for independent, Europe-anchored solutions that remain within local control. This drive for sovereignty isn’t just about satellite; it extends across the entire telecom stack, particularly the cloud.
Key announcements:
Deutsche Telekom’s Cloud Ambitions: DT delivered a standout presentation at its booth, detailing its heavy investment in its cloud business. It noted it is currently at roughly 80% feature parity with AWS and is pushing for 100% by year-end, with plans to expand its cloud availability regions beyond the DACH.
Orange’s Pan-European Sovereign Edge: Orange joined forces with Deutsche Telekom, Telefónica, TIM, and Vodafone to launch the “European Edge Continuum.” This first-of-its-kind federated edge cloud allows enterprises to deploy applications seamlessly across all five operator networks via a single entry point, providing a secure, sovereign alternative to U.S.-based public hyperscalers.
Post-quantum security: Several Tier-1 operators showcased active implementations of Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) across their networks, ensuring that sovereign data remains secure against future quantum computing threats.
Our take: Digital sovereignty is driving renewed focus from leading telcos in their B2B operations, as demand rises for local platforms capable of hosting sovereign AI models and evolving cloud workloads. For telcos, this is a massive B2B opportunity. By offering secure, localized solutions that align with national data regulations, operators can position themselves as the active shield of the digital economy, moving far beyond basic connectivity.
AI in telecom: moving beyond an efficiency play
AI was omnipresent at MWC26, but the narrative has evolved from generative AI chatbots to “agentic AI” and network-level intelligence.
Key announcements:
AI-Enhanced Calling: Asian operators (like LG Uplus and China Mobile), along with Deutsche Telekom, are injecting new innovation into a historically stagnant area: the calling experience, using AI for real-time translation and network-driven functions like enhanced interactive video. Deutsche Telekom showcased similar examples, drawing on recent announcements around AI-translated calling features in the U.S.
AT&T’s connected AI: AT&T outlined its industrial edge strategy, partnering with major hyperscalers to position its fiber and edge infrastructure as the backbone for enterprise AI workloads.
Our take: AI is framing nearly every technical discussion in telecom, but it’s clear that most of the focus has been on using AI to streamline operations and target cost-cutting. MWC 26 saw this evolve, with developments targeting improvements to the user experience – most notably for voice services, and a renewed focus on the edge with AI-RAN.
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.
Mike Dano is a Lead Industry Analyst in Ookla’s research and content team. He covers the North and South American markets, and global technology trends. Previously, Mike was a journalist covering the global telecom industry for 25 years at publications including RCR Wireless News, Fierce Network and Light Reading.
Mark Giles heads up Ookla Research™, leading a team of expert analysts in transforming the world's largest repository of network performance data into authoritative insights. Mark is passionate about using data to illuminate the state of global connectivity, in order to advocate for a better, more accessible internet for all.
Luke Kehoe leads Ookla’s research and thought leadership efforts in Europe.
An electronic engineering alumnus of University College Dublin, Luke has extensive experience collaborating with mobile operators, telecoms vendors, and government agencies in research and advisory roles across Europe. He has contributed to internationally recognised thought leadership publications in areas such as 5G, IoT, open RAN, and edge computing, working with prestigious organisations like the Telecom Infra Project and the World Economic Forum.
Karim Yaici is the Lead Industry Analyst at Ookla covering the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region. Previously, he directed Analysys Mason's MEA research program, where he was responsible for telecoms forecasts, market reports, consumer surveys, and custom research.
