A new report from Ookla found that the digital divide increased for 32 states between 1H 2024 and 2H 2024, indicating that much of the broadband expansion is occurring in urban areas instead of rural areas.
Key Takeaways
The number of states with 60% or more of users experiencing the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream increased from 10 states in the 1H of 2024 to 22 states (and the District of Columbia) in the 2H of 2024.
New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, North Dakota, and Maryland are the top five states with the highest percentage of Speedtest users with 100/20 Mbps.
32 states saw their digital divide increase between the 1H of 2024 and the 2H of 2024 and 17 states saw their digital divide decrease.
Many U.S. states made sizable gains in their broadband infrastructure during 2024 and much of that growth was fueled by private equity financing, mergers and acquisitions, capex investments, and government funding.
According to Ookla Speedtest Intelligence® data, the number of states in the U.S. delivering the minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds as designated by the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream is growing. In fact, in our latest U.S. State Broadband Report, we found that states with 60% or more of Speedtest users receiving 100/20 Mbps dramatically increased between the first half and the second half of 2024.
However, that increase didn’t result in sweeping improvements to the digital divide. Instead, 32 states saw their gap between the percentage of urban users and rural users that receive the minimum required broadband speeds grow during this time period. Ookla uses the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification to determine which users are urban vs. rural.
New Jersey is No. 1
Seven states now have 65% or more of Speedtest users experiencing the FCC’s minimum standard for broadband of 100/20 Mbps. New Jersey is No. 1 with 68.97% of Speedtest users experiencing the FCC’s minimum requirement followed closely by Connecticut with 68.35%. Delaware moved up from the No. 5 slot in the first half of the year to the No. 3 ranking in the second half of 2024.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Montana and Alaska have fewer than 40% of Speedtest users that receive the minimum broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps so it’s no surprise that Montana and Alaska are also two of the least densely populated states in the country.
Digital Divide Grows
While the number of states with 60% or more of users experiencing 100/20 Mbps more than doubled from the first half of 2024 to the second half of 2024, it appears that much of that progress occurred in urban areas because the digital divide, which is the gap between urban and rural users in a state, became much more prominent in 32 states during that time period.
Washington state leads the nation with the biggest digital divide in the second half of 2024 and it was also at the top of the list in the first half of the year. Oregon and Illinois are also top states with the biggest digital divide in the second half of the year.
The lack of affordable broadband is known to exacerbate the digital divide and some of this increase in the digital divide is likely due to the demise of the Affordable Connectivity Plan (ACP), which provided discounted broadband services to more than 23 million low-income U.S. households. The FCC ended the ACP program on June 1, 2024, because of a lack of Congressional funding.
Download the Full Report
To find your state’s standing and how it compares to the other 49 states 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.
Check out the full report available now with the complete results for all 50 states.
Affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband is considered a necessity in the U.S. because it enables people to access online classes, secure health care assistance, register for basic government services, handle their banking needs and participate in many other essential services.
It’s also critical to the economic viability of every state because it supports remote workers, enables businesses to operate more efficiently and attracts new enterprises to an area.
But many states have struggled to make broadband service available to 100% of their residents primarily because service providers are focused on providing it to areas where it’s most profitable. Using Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence® data, this report identifies the states that are currently delivering the minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds as established by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to the highest percentage of Speedtest users. It also singles out the states that need the most improvement when it comes to delivering the minimum standard for broadband to their residents.
Key takeaways
Connecticut, North Dakota, Delaware and six other states are the top performing states because they have the highest percentage of Speedtest users that meet the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream. While comparing small, densely populated states with larger, sparsely populated states may seem unfair, we thought it was important to note the current performance of each state so we can track their progress in future reports.
New Mexico, Arizona and Minnesota saw the biggest improvement in the percentage of Speedtest users getting the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (100 Mbps down/20 Mbps up) between the first half of 2023 and the first half of 2024.
Washington, Alaska, Illinois and Oregon have the most prominent digital divide of all the 50 states. These four states have the biggest gap between the percentage of rural Speedtest users vs. the percentage of urban Speedtest users that get FCC’s minimum standard of broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.
Not surprisingly, less than 40% of the Speedtest users of Alaska, Montana and Wyoming (which are three of the least densely populated states in the U.S.), are receiving the minimum broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.
Broadband in the spotlight
The COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on the importance of having broadband access and the role it played in allowing people to continue working and receiving access to healthcare as well as keeping students in school. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 provided $3.2 billion to help low-income households in the U.S. pay for broadband access during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This sudden focus on broadband accessibility, also prompted Congress to pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 which set aside $42.5 billion for the Broadband, Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program and provided funding for every state to expand its broadband services. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) runs the BEAD program and the funding is being used for planning, infrastructure, and adoption programs in all 50 states, Washington, DC and several U.S. territories.
BEAD initially provided $100 million to every state with the remainder of the funding to be divided among the 50 states based upon their unserved and underserved populations. As of September 18, 2024, 44 eligible entities have been approved for both the Volume 1 and Volume 2 phases of BEAD. Volume 1 of the state’s proposal details the list of locations that are eligible for BEAD funding as well as a description of how certain entities can dispute the eligibility status of the various locations. Volume 2 includes each state’s description of how it plans to select ISPs and its overall broadband objectives. Once approved for both phases, states can then get access to the money that has been allocated for them.
To help manage these federal funds every state and territory established a broadband office that is tasked with determining the extent of their broadband coverage problems and draft broadband strategies that will resolve the problem.
The FCC in March 2024 decided to revise its current definition of broadband as 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream, which is a substantial upgrade from its previous benchmark of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload speed that was first established in 2015.
This is the first time in nearly a decade that the FCC raised the speed requirement. Although this new benchmark is being used throughout the U.S., many households still lack basic broadband services.
Top performing states
Using Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence® data collected in the first half of 2024 we were able to compare the median download and upload speeds in all 50 states and identify the states that currently doing the best job of delivering the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream) to the highest percentage of Speedtest users.
At least 60% or more of the Speedtest users in Connecticut, North Dakota, Delaware, Maryland, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah and Virginia are getting the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream. In Connecticut, which is the top state, 65.8% of Speedtest users are receiving the minimum broadband standard. But at just 65.8% that indicates that there is much more work ahead for states.
Interestingly, all nine of the states in this list have received final approval for both phases of BEAD funding. However, it’s unlikely that BEAD funding approval played any role in these nine states leading the rest of the country in delivering the minimum standard for broadband because BEAD funding isn’t expected to start impacting broadband deployment projects until 2025 at the earliest, with some states having to wait longer depending on their proposal status with NTIA.
Top performing U.S. states with over 60% of Speedtest users achieving broadband speeds
Rank
State
Percentage of Speedtest users achieving broadband speeds
BEAD funding approval
1
Connecticut
65.8
Yes
2
North Dakota
65.5
Yes
3
Maryland
63.7
Yes
4
Delaware
63.3
Yes
5
Rhode Island
62.7
Yes
6
Tennessee
62.2
Yes
7
Utah
61.8
Yes
8
New Hampshire
60.5
Yes
9
Virginia
60.1
Yes
Source: Ookla Speedtest data. *Note NTIA approval of BEAD funding is changing rapidly. While BEAD funds haven’t likely played a role in broadband deployments yet, they will in the future.
Southwestern US sees big improvements in broadband
New Mexico, Arizona and Minnesota saw the biggest improvement in the percentage of their residents getting the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (100 Mbps down/20 Mbps up) between the first half of 2023 and the first half of 2024.
New Mexico leads the rest of the states with its gains in broadband in the past year. Ookla data indicates that New Mexico saw a 50% increase in the percentage of its population with access to the FCC’s minimum broadband speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps. Arizona also saw a 45% jump in the percent of its population with access to the FCC’s minimum broadband speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps.
Arizona, and specifically, the city of Mesa, AZ, has been a hotbed of activity for fiber deployments. In 2022 Google Fiber decided to deploy fiber to Mesa, AZ after the city council approved plans to bring a data center to the area. In addition, AT&T also announced plans to bring its fiber service to Mesa in 2023. These new fiber entrants are competing with existing broadband providers Cox Communications and Lumen.
U.S. states with largest year-on-year increase in Speedtest users achieving broadband speeds
Rank
State
Increase in Speedtest users obtaining broadband speeds (1H 2023 vs 1H 2024)
BEAD funding approval
1
New Mexico
50%
Yes
2
Arizona
45%
Yes
3
Nevada
37%
Yes
4
Minnesota
38%
No
5
Colorado
35%
Yes
6
Washington
35%
Yes
7
Oregon
32%
Yes
8
Wyoming
32%
Yes
9
Maine
30%
Yes
10
Utah
29%
Yes
Source: Ookla Speedtest data. *Note NTIA approval of BEAD funding is changing rapidly. While BEAD funds haven’t likely played a role in broadband deployments yet, they will in the future.
Sparse population equals inferior broadband
Not surprisingly, the most sparsely populated states in the U.S. tend to also have the smallest percentage of their population receiving the FCC’s minimum broadband speeds. Building broadband networks in rural states is incredibly expensive, and in some areas the terrain can make it nearly impossible. For example, in Alaska, where the ground may be frozen for many months out of the year, it’s difficult to dig trenches to install fiber.
Ookla’s Speedtest data collected in the first half of 2024 found that less than 40% of the residents of Alaska, Montana and Wyoming (which are three of the most sparsely populated states in the U.S.), receive the minimum broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.
The digital divide is still evident in many states
A big part of the impetus behind the federal government’s BEAD program is to finally close the gap between those with and without access to broadband, or what is commonly referred to as the digital divide.
But there are still many states that have a prominent gap between the number of rural and urban residents that have access to the FCC’s minimum standard of broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.
Using the Census Bureau’s urban-rural classification and Ookla data compiled in the 1H of 2024, Washington, Alaska, Illinois and Oregon have the biggest digital divide compared to the other 50 states. For example, while 61.1% of urban Speedtest users in Washington state receive broadband speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps, only 28.7% of its rural Speedtest users receive those same speeds.
Breaking Down the Digital Divide
Percentage of urban and rural Speedtest users in each state with access to broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps.
Broadband speeds are improving but more work is needed
U.S. broadband networks offer faster and more reliable connectivity to more people today than they did just a few years ago, however there’s still a large percentage of the U.S. population without adequate access to broadband connectivity.
Thanks to new funding such as the BEAD program, there are many efforts underway to improve modern broadband networks. We expect to see these advancements in 2025 as more states start to put their BEAD funding into action.
We will provide semi-annual updates on the broadband speed performance of providers in the 50 states and also to track the improvements that states are making to bridge the digital divide. For more information about Speedtest Intelligence data and insights, please get in touch.
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.
More than 80% of Canadians have access to fixed broadband networks, but for rural Canadians that figure drops to just 60%. Yet, this gap between who has broadband access and who doesn’t is closing in rural areas at a rate nearly three times faster than in urban areas. Canada is narrowing its rural broadband divide thanks to a clearly articulated and well-funded connectivity strategy to ensure high-speed internet access for all.
Using Speedtest Intelligence® data, this report identifies Canada’s Provinces and Territories that are delivering the minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds, as established by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). Based on data from the 1H 2024 (and compared to 1H 2023), it also analyzes performance in other geographic splits, including Urban-vs-Rural and the Remoteness Index.
Key Takeaways
As many as 2 million more Canadians enjoyed broadband speeds in the first half of 2024 compared to the first half of 2023.
Rural Canadian Speedtest users saw a 23% increase in those with broadband speeds in 1H 2024over 1H 2023.
Satellite internet service plays a key role in closing the broadband divide for Canada’s vast geography. In the U.S., regulators were ambivalent about allowing satellite internet to qualify for government broadband funding (this attitude has recently begun to change in favor). Canada knew many years ago that satellite internet was critical.
Broadband in the Spotlight
While the COVID-19 pandemic shined a light on the digital divide, the government of Canada has long been investing in broadband deployments to close the gap. In 2014 it established the Connecting Canadians program (CCP), allocating C$305M to improve connectivity for 300,000 underserved households.
The Connect to Innovate (CTI) program was launched in December 2016 with C$500M (and C$85M added to CTI in 2019) to expand high-speed Internet in communities underserved by the private sector. The CTI aimed to improve access for over 380,000 homes.
Deepening its investments in 2020, perhaps in response to COVID-19 lockdowns, the Canadian government launched the C$3.225B Universal Broadband Fund (UBF).
UBF
Universal Broadband Fund (2020)
$3.225B
CTI
Connect To Innovate (2016)
$585M
CCP
Connecting Canadians Program (2014)
$305M
With over C$4B from these programs alone, the CRTC has a goal of connecting 98% of Canadians to high-speed internet (broadband) delivering at least 50 Mbps download (DL) and 10 Mbps upload (UL) speeds (50/10 Mbps) by 2026, and 100% by 2030.
Conquer Divide
Canada’s population of 41 million is concentrated in a handful of large, urban metropolitan areas near the U.S. border. However, despite the country’s large land mass, it is highly urbanized. Approximately two-thirds, or 27 million, of Canadians live within 100 kilometers of the U.S. border —about the distance from the border to Winnipeg —yet this is only 4% of Canada’s land mass.
Imagine a line across lower Canada, 100 km north of Canada’s southern border – crossing Winnipeg in the middle of the population distribution map. In the area below the line and above the border with the U.S., 82.2% of Speedtest users are getting the CRTC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (50/10 Mbps). For Speedtest users north of the 100 km line, 76.3% met (or exceeded) the standard. Just a 5.9 percentage points gap.
However, the 100 km line is rather blunt and unsophisticated (and imaginary). Instead let’s look at the Urban-vs-Rural division as well as a more-granular designation based on the Remoteness Index.
Compared with the 100 km line’s gap, the Urban-vs-Rural digital divide aligns more closely with expectations of a larger disparity between these geographic areas. Specifically, 83.8% of Urban users meet the 50/10 Mbps standard, compared to 60.0% of Rural users resulting in a 23.8 percentage point gap.
The good news is the gap has closed from the prior year with Rural users seeing a 23% improvement compared to 5% for Urban users. To emphasize this further, in the first half of 2023 fewer than 50% of Rural users were able to get broadband speeds of 50/10 Mbps. This indicates that efforts to address this gap (i.e., UBF) were targeting the right places.
Continuing across the table, median download and upload speeds are roughly three times faster among urban than rural Speedtest users (DL 251.62 Mbps vs 90.76 Mbps and UL 64.82 Mbps vs 18.88 Mbps, respectively). Comparing the rural median speeds to the 50/10 Mbps threshold shows that half of Speedtest users in rural Canada enjoy download speeds that are 40.76 Mbps (i.e., 90.76 minus 50) and upload speeds that are 8.88 Mbps (i.e., 18.88 minus 10) faster than the target. (This is not to say that an individual Speedtest user experiences both upload and download speeds over the threshold, which is required for the target.)
The difference in Urban and Rural latency literally demonstrates the difference in physical distances (which not only means farther, but also more hops or switching; even buffering time based on the capacity of the data transport) .
The Remoteness Index presents a similar picture in finer geographic slices. (As one would expect, since the underlying data is the same.) Not surprisingly, the percentage of Speedtest users that meet the 50/10 Mbps threshold decreases as their location moves from least remote to most remote. Here too, speed and latency degrade at each step of remoteness, correlating with those meeting the 50/10 Mbps threshold percentages.
The percentage change from the prior year tells a similar story of greater improvement in the more remote geographies, but with some nuance. While we might expect Most Remote to demonstrate even more improvement and be greater than More Remote, deployment challenges and associated costs to deliver telecommunications infrastructure in the most remote geographies can be exponentially prohibitive. Thus, this extreme lack of population density coupled with difficult topography explain why government programs like CTI are needed, and why other solutions like satellite are viable.
The Provinces and The Territories
In the above analysis, broadband speeds were assessed using an imaginary 100 km demarcation, illustrating the concentration of population along Canada’s southern border. Before examining broadband performance and the digital divide among Canada’s provinces and territories, here are additional facts about Canada’s relative sparseness of people in its vast geography.
Landmass: The combined land area of the territories (Yukon, Northwest, Nunavut) is larger than the land area of India, the world’s 7th largest (and most populous) country
Population: The population of the territories is equivalent to the total number of births across Canada every four months.
The territories hold just 0.3% of Canada’s population on 39% of its land. Canada is often compared to the U.S., but Australia is a better comparison, with both Canada and Australia ranking among the least densely populated countries in the world.
Now let’s examine the 50/10 Mbps threshold in the provinces and territories.
Province / Territory
% Meeting 50/10 Mbps 1H 2024
Change from 1H 2023
Urban-Rural Gap 1H 2024, %pts
Newfoundland and Labrador
81.7
6%
22.5
British Columbia
79.8
4%
21.9
New Brunswick
78.1
2%
14.0
Nova Scotia
77.8
9%
8.2
Québec
76.5
8%
9.8
Ontario
76.0
8%
33.9
Alberta
75.7
5%
30.0
Manitoba
71.7
11%
20.8
Prince Edward Island
71.2
14%
18.5
Saskatchewan
64.7
17%
33.0
Northwest Territories
57.3
8%
-7.1
Yukon Territory
53.2
14%
6.7
Nunavut
36.2
94%
Not meaningful
In this table, by geography, percentage of Speedtest users achieving the CRTC broadband speed targets in 1H 2024, compared with the same period in prior year, and the digital divide.
Following the logic of the Remoteness Index, the territories have the fewest Speedtest users meeting the 50/10 Mbps threshold. The percentage changes in the territories from 2023 do not follow the same pattern seen in the Urban-vs-Rural chart and Remoteness Index because these geographies are a mix of these geographic definitions (as it is in the provinces). Similarly, the Urban-vs-Rural gap result is confounded by sparse population. In Nunavut, more than half of the population is defined as rural.
On the top of the table, Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia may be unexpected leaders in meeting the 50/10 Mbps threshold. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have relatively higher population density among the provinces and territories which (economically) encourages the deployment of telecommunications infrastructure. This appears to play out in the Urban-vs-Rural gap as well, ranking among the lowest gaps in the provinces.
The exceptional performance of Newfoundland and Labrador (81.7% meeting 50/10 Mbps) can partly be attributed to the vast majority of its population residing on the island of Newfoundland, and half of them, in turn, residing on the Avalon peninsula (see the population distribution map above and St. John’s in the east). This concentration of population underscores the fundamental reality of economics in telecommunications deployment. And in the opposite direction, the Urban-vs-Rural gap (22.5%pts) also makes this same point for the need for the funding programs like UBF to address the digital divide.
Breaking Down the Digital Divide
Percentage of Urban and Rural Speedtest users in each Province/Territory with broadband speeds of at least 50/10 Mbps, 1H 2024, Nunavut: Urban n too small; Rural 43.6%
Look, Up in the Sky
As addressed in the discussion about Most Remote, because of Canada’s topographical challenges, fiber and electricity are cost prohibitive in many deployment cases. In 2019, Canada added C$85M to its CTI program because it recognized that it needed support for low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites to reach its connectivity goals (50/10 Mbps connectivity to 95% of Canadians by 2026, and the hardest-to-reach Canadians by 2030).
Briefly looking across Canada for Speedtest users of satellite internet services during the first half of 2024, over half saw download speeds of 72.90 Mbps or greater, and upload speeds of 12.47 or greater. Moreover, in the territory of Nunavut the speeds were basically identical (75.16 Mbps and 12.50 Mbps, respectively), which makes sense since Nunavut is equally Urban or Rural (or More Remote or Less Remote) to an orbiting satellite a few hundred miles overhead. Clearly LEO is a viable solution technically and economically.
Whether fiber or satellite, broadband connectivity means nothing without power. The cost of electricity in the north can be ten times more expensive than in southern cities. In some cases, diesel fuel burned for both heat and electricity is flown, shipped by sea, or by tanker over frozen lakes and rivers in the winter. As with broadband, the Canadian government has a plan to invest in Rural and Northern Communities to make available affordable and clean energy.
Another barrier to fully-connected communities that affects Urban as well as the Most Remote is digital literacy (though the latter faces compounding factors). Here again the Canadian government is addressing the issue with initiatives such as its Digital Literacy Exchange Program.
No matter the geographic lens – Urban-vs-Rural, Remoteness Index, or Provinces and Territories – the goal is to get to 100% in 2030. But even 100% broadband connectivity from a purely technical perspective, would not be 100% in spirit without other programs and initiatives like these. Communication is achieved when the signal is received, not just sent.
Recently, Ookla also looked at the broadband and digital divide in the U.S. – How the 50 U.S. States Stack up in Broadband Speed Performance: 1H 2024 | Ookla®. We look forward to providing more updates on the U.S. and Canada’s progress to provide high-speed internet connectivity for all. For more information about Speedtest Intelligence data and insights, please get in touch.
Le Rétrécissement de la Fracture Numérique au Canada
Plus de 80 % des Canadiens ont accès à des réseaux fixes à large bande, mais pour les Canadiens des régions rurales, ce chiffre tombe à seulement 60 %. Pourtant, cet écart entre ceux qui ont accès à la large bande et ceux qui n’en ont pas se rétrécit dans les régions rurales à un rythme près de trois fois plus rapide que dans les zones urbaines. Le Canada réduit la fracture numérique dans les régions rurales grâce à une stratégie de connectivité clairement articulée et bien financée pour assurer l’accès à l’Internet haute vitesse pour tous.
À l’aide des données de Speedtest Intelligence®, le présent rapport identifie les provinces et les territoires du Canada qui fournissent la norme minimale pour les vitesses à large bande fixes, telle qu’établie par le Conseil de la Radiodiffusion et des Télécommunications Canadiennes (CRTC). Sur la base des données du 1er semestre 2024 (et par rapport au 1er semestre 2023), il analyse également les performances dans d’autres catégories géographiques, y compris les catégories urbaine et rurale ainsi que l’indice d’éloignement (Remoteness Index).
Principaux points à retenir
Pas moins de 2 millions de Canadiens supplémentaires ont bénéficié de l’accès à Internet haute vitesse au premier semestre 2024 par rapport au premier semestre 2023.
Les utilisateurs ruraux canadiens de Speedtest ont vu une augmentation de 23 % de ceux qui ont accès à Internet haute vitesse au cours du premier semestre 2024par rapport au premier semestre 2023.
Le service Internet par satellite constitue un levier essentiel pour réduire la fracture numérique et améliorer l’accès à la large bande sur l’immense territoire canadien. Aux États-Unis, les organismes de réglementation étaient ambivalents quant à autoriser le financement par le gouvernement de l’Internet par satellite (cette attitude a récemment commencé à changer). Le Canada savait il y a de nombreuses années que l’Internet par satellite était essentiel.
La large bande sous les feux de la rampe
Alors que la pandémie de COVID-19 a mise en lumière la fracture numérique, le gouvernement du Canada investit depuis longtemps dans le déploiement de la large bande pour réduire cet écart. En 2014, il a mis sur pied le programme Un Canada branché, allouant 305 millions de dollars canadiens pour améliorer la connectivité de 300 000 ménages mal desservis.
Le programme Brancher pour innover a été lancé en décembre 2016 avec 500 millions de dollars canadiens (85 millions de dollars canadiens supplémentaires alloués en 2019) pour étendre l’accès a l’Internet à haut débit dans les communautés mal desservies par le secteur privé. Ce programme visait à améliorer l’accès à plus de 380 000 foyers.
Renforçant ses investissements en 2020, peut-être en réponse aux confinement lié au COVID-19, le gouvernement canadien a lancé le Fonds universel pour la large bande, doté de 3,225 milliards de dollars canadiens.
UBF
Fonds universel pour la large bande (2020)
3,225 milliards de dollars
CTI
Brancher pour innover (2016)
585 M$
CCP
Programme « Un Canada branché » (2014)
305 M$
Avec plus de 4 milliards de dollars canadiens provenant de ces programmes uniquement, le CRTC a pour objectif de connecter 98 % des Canadiens à l’Internet haute vitesse (large bande) offrant des vitesses d’au moins 50 Mbps en téléchargement (DL) et 10 Mbps en téléversement (UL) (50/10 Mbps) d’ici 2026, et 100 % d’ici 2030.
Vaincre la fracture
La population de 41 millions d’habitants du Canada est concentrée dans une poignée de métropoles près de la frontière américaine. Malgré l’immensité du pays, le Canada est fortement urbanisé. Environ les deux tiers, soit 27 millions, des Canadiens vivent à moins de 100 kilomètres de la frontière américaine, soit environ la distance entre la frontière et Winnipeg; mais cette zone ne représente que 4 % de la superficie du Canada.
Imaginez une ligne traversant le Canada, à 100 km au nord de sa frontière méridionale, et traversant Winnipeg au milieu de la carte de répartition de la population. Dans la zone située sous la ligne de démarcation et au-dessus de la frontière avec les États-Unis, 82,2 % des utilisateurs de Speedtest obtiennent la norme minimale du CRTC pour les vitesses des services à large bande fixe (50/10 Mbps). Pour les utilisateurs du Speedtest au nord de la ligne des 100 km, 76,3 % respectent (ou dépassent) la norme. Soit un écart de seulement 5,9 points.
Cependant, la ligne des 100 km reste une mesure assez simpliste, peu sophistiquée et, de surcroît, imaginaire. Examinons plutôt la division entre les zones urbaines et rurales, ainsi qu’une classification plus détaillée basée sur l’indice d’éloignement.
Comparée à celle définie par la ligne des 100 km, la fracture numérique entre les zones urbaines et rurales correspond davantage aux attentes, reflétant une disparité plus marquée entre ces zones géographiques. Plus précisément, 83,8 % des utilisateurs urbains respectent la norme de 50/10 Mbps, comparativement à 60,0 % des utilisateurs ruraux, ce qui donne un écart de 23,8 points.
La bonne nouvelle est que l’écart s’est réduit par rapport à l’année précédente, les utilisateurs ruraux ayant constaté une amélioration de 23 %, contre 5 % pour les utilisateurs urbains. Pour souligner davantage ce point, au cours du premier semestre de 2023, moins de 50 % des utilisateurs ruraux ont pu obtenir des vitesses à large bande de 50/10 Mbps. Cela indique que les efforts déployés pour combler cette lacune (c’est-à-dire le Fonds universel pour la large bande) ont été utilisés à bonne fin.
Si l’on poursuit la lecture du tableau, les vitesses médianes de téléchargement et de téléversement sont environ trois fois plus élevées chez les utilisateurs urbains que chez les utilisateurs ruraux de Speedtest (DL 251,62 Mbps contre 90,76 Mbps et UL 64,82 Mbps contre 18,88 Mbps, respectivement). La comparaison des vitesses médianes en milieu rural avec le seuil de 50/10 Mbps montre que la moitié des utilisateurs de Speedtest dans les régions rurales du Canada bénéficient de vitesses de téléchargement de 40,76 Mbps (c.-à-d. 90,76 moins 50) et de vitesses de téléversement de 8,88 Mbps (c.-à-d. 18,88 moins 10) plus rapides que l’objectif fixé. (Cela ne signifie pas pour autant qu’un utilisateur individuel de Speedtest bénéficie à la fois de vitesses de téléchargement et de téléversement dépassant le seuil requis, ce qui est nécessaire pour atteindre l’objectif.)
La différence entre les temps de latence en milieu urbain et en milieu rural illustre littéralement la différence entre les distances physiques (ce qui signifie non seulement des distances plus grandes, mais aussi un plus grand nombre de sauts de traffic).
L’indice d’éloignement présente une image similaire dans des tranches géographiques plus fines. (Comme on pouvait s’y attendre, puisque les données sous-jacentes sont les mêmes.) Il n’est pas surprenant de constater que le pourcentage d’utilisateurs Speedtest qui atteignent le seuil de 50/10 Mbps diminue au fur et à mesure que cette indice augmente. Ici aussi, la vitesse et la latence se dégradent avec l’augmentation de l’indice, en corrélation avec le pourcentage d’utilisateurs atteignant de seuil de 50/10 Mbps.
La variation (en pourcentage) par rapport à l’année précédente offre des similarités, avec une amélioration dans les zones géographiques les plus éloignées, mais avec tout en apportant une certaine nuance. On pourrait s’attendre à ce que les régions les plus éloignées s’améliorent, mais les difficultés de déploiement et les coûts associés à la mise en place d’une infrastructure de télécommunications dans les zones géographiques les plus reculées peuvent être exponentiellement prohibitifs. Ainsi, ce manque extrême de densité de population, associé à une topographie difficile, explique pourquoi des programmes gouvernementaux sont nécessaires et pourquoi d’autres solutions comme l’accès par satellite sont viables.
Les provinces et les territoires
Dans l’analyse ci-dessus, les vitesses à large bande ont été évaluées à l’aide d’une démarcation imaginaire de 100 km, illustrant la concentration de la population le long de la frontière sud du Canada. Avant d’examiner les performances de la large bande et la fracture numérique parmi les provinces et territoires du Canada, voici quelques faits supplémentaires concernant la relative faiblesse de la densité de population dans l’immensité géographique du pays.
Masse continentale : La superficie terrestre combinée des territoires (Yukon, Nord-Ouest, Nunavut) est plus grande que la superficie de l’Inde, le 7e pays le plus grand (et le plus peuplé) du monde
Population : La population des territoires équivaut au nombre total de naissances au Canada tous les quatre mois.
Les territoires ne représentent que 0,3 % de la population du Canada mais 39 % de son territoire. Le Canada est souvent comparé aux États-Unis, mais l’Australie est une meilleure comparaison; le Canada et l’Australie se classant parmi les pays les moins densément peuplés du monde.
Examinons maintenant le seuil de 50/10 Mbps dans les provinces et les territoires.
Province / Territoire
% Atteignant l’objectif 50/10 Mbps 1H 2024
Changement par rapport à 1H 2023
Écart entre les zones urbaines et rurales 1H 2024, %pts
Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador
81,7
6 %
22,5
Colombie-Britannique
79,8
4 %
21,9
Nouveau-Brunswick
78,1
2 %
14,0
Nouvelle-Écosse
77,8
9 %
8,2
Québec
76,5
8 %
9,8
Ontario
76,0
8 %
33,9
Alberta
75,7
5 %
30,0
Manitoba
71,7
11 %
20,8
Île-du-Prince-Édouard
71,2
14 %
18,5
Saskatchewan
64,7
17 %
33,0
Territoires du Nord-Ouest
57,3
8 %
-7,1
Territoire du Yukon
53,2
14 %
6,7
Nunavut
36,2
94 %
Pas significatif
Pourcentage d’utilisateurs de Speedtest atteignant les objectifs de vitesse de large bande du CRTC au premier semestre 2024 par région par rapport à la même période de l’année précédente.
Suivant la logique de l’indice d’éloignement, les territoires ont le moins d’utilisateurs Speedtest répondant au seuil de 50/10 Mbps. Les variations en pourcentage dans les territoires à partir de 2023 ne suivent pas la même tendance que celle observée dans le graphique urbain/rural et l’indice d’éloignement, car ces géographies sont un mélange de ces définitions géographiques (comme c’est le cas dans les provinces). De même, le résultat de l’écart entre les zones urbaines et les zones rurales est faussé par la faible densité de population. Au Nunavut, plus de la moitié de la population est définie comme rurale.
En haut du tableau, Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, le Nouveau-Brunswick et la Nouvelle-Écosse pourraient être des chefs de file inattendus dans la réalisation du seuil de 50/10 Mbps. Le Nouveau-Brunswick et la Nouvelle-Écosse ont une densité de population relativement plus élevée parmi les provinces et les territoires, ce qui encourage (économiquement) le déploiement de l’infrastructure de télécommunications. Cela semble également se jouer dans l’écart entre les régions urbaines et rurales, qui se classe parmi les écarts les plus faibles dans les provinces.
La performance exceptionnelle de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador (81,7 % atteignant 50/10 Mbps) peut en partie être attribuée au fait que la grande majorité de sa population réside sur l’île du Terre Neuve, dont la moitié vit sur la péninsule d’Avalon (voir la carte de répartition de la population ci-dessus et la ville de St. John’s à l’est). Cette concentration de population souligne la réalité fondamentale de l’économie dans le déploiement des télécommunications. Et dans la direction opposée, l’écart entre les zones urbaines et rurales (22,5 % de points) souligne également la nécessité de programmes de financement pour combler la fracture numérique.
Briser la fracture numérique
Pourcentage d’utilisateurs de Speedtest fixe en milieu urbain et rural dans chaque province et territoire ayant accès à des vitesses à large bande de 50/10 Mbps, 1H 2024, Nunavut: Urbain n trop petit; Rural 43.6%
Regardez vers les étoiles
Comme mentionné précédemment, en raison des défis topographiques du Canada, la fibre et l’électricité peuvent avoir des coûts de déploiement prohibitifs dans de nombreux cas. En 2019, le Canada a ajouté 85 millions de dollars canadiens à son programme Brancher pour innover (CTI), car il a reconnu qu’il avait besoin de satellites en orbite basse (LEO) pour atteindre ses objectifs en matière de connectivité (connectivité de 50/10 Mbps pour 95 % des Canadiens d’ici 2026, et pour les Canadiens les plus difficiles à atteindre d’ici 2030).
En examinant brièvement les utilisateurs de Speedtest des services Internet par satellite à travers le Canada durant la première moitié de 2024, plus de la moitié ont enregistré des vitesses de téléchargement de 72,90 Mbps ou supérieures, ainsi que des vitesses de téléversement de 12,47 Mbps ou supérieures. De plus, dans le territoire du Nunavut, les vitesses étaient pratiquement identiques (75,16 Mbps et 12,50 Mbps, respectivement), ce qui est logique, puisque le Nunavut est à la fois urbain et rural (ou plus éloigné et moins éloigné) pour un satellite en orbite à quelques centaines de kilomètres au-dessus. Il est clair que le LEO est une solution viable techniquement et économiquement.
Qu’il s’agisse de fibre ou de satellite, la connectivité à large bande ne signifie rien sans électricité. Le coût de l’électricité dans le nord peut être dix fois plus élevé que dans les villes du sud. Dans certains cas, le carburant diesel utilisé pour le chauffage et l’électricité est transporté par avion, par bateau ou par camion-citerne sur des lacs et des rivières gelés en hiver. Comme pour la large bande, le gouvernement canadien a un plan pour investir dans les collectivités rurales et nordiques afin de rendre disponible une énergie propre et abordable.
Un autre obstacle à des communautés pleinement connectées, qui touche tant les zones urbaines que les régions les plus éloignées, est la maîtrise des outils numériques (bien que ces dernières fassent face à des facteurs aggravants). Là encore, le gouvernement canadien s’attaque au problème avec des initiatives comme son Programme d’échange en matière de littératie numérique.
Peu importe la perspective géographique – urbain par rapport à rural, indice d’éloignement ou provinces et territoires – l’objectif est d’atteindre 100 % en 2030. Mais même une connectivité à large bande à 100 %, d’un point de vue purement technique, ne serait pas à 100 % dans l’esprit sans d’autres programmes et initiatives comme ceux-ci. La communication est réalisée lorsque le signal est reçu, pas seulement envoyé.
Récemment, Ookla a également examiné la fracture numérique et l’accès à la large bande aux États-Unis. – Comment les 50 États américains se positionnent en matière de vitesse de la large bande : 1H 2024 | Ookla®. Nous sommes impatients de fournir d’autres mises à jour sur les progrès réalisés par les États-Unis et le Canada pour fournir une connectivité Internet haute vitesse pour tous. Pour plus d’informations sur les données et les analyses de Speedtest Intelligence, veuillez prendre contact.
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.
The global digital divide continues to widen. While nearly a quarter of consumer broadband subscribers in developed markets now use gigabit plans – projected to reach 50% by 2029 – developing countries often struggle to keep pace. This emerging “digital divide 2.0” represents not only a gap in access to basic connectivity, but also in the quality of broadband infrastructure. With pioneering countries like Singapore implementing nationwide 10-gigabit strategies, advanced markets are rapidly deploying high-speed fiber networks, whereas emerging markets often struggle to maintain even basic connectivity standards.
To better understand these disparities, comprehensive network data can offer valuable insights into connectivity performance. The Fiber Development Index (FDI) – a collaboration between Ookla, the World Broadband Association (WBBA), and Omdia – benchmarks fiber development across 93 countries by analyzing infrastructure development, market trends, and quality of experience measurements. Using median download and upload speeds, latency, and jitter data from Speedtest Intelligence, the FDI provides crucial insights into actual broadband performance and availability worldwide.
In this article, we’ll examine the current state of global broadband development, explore what sets market leaders apart, and analyze some key challenges facing U.S. broadband expansion. For deeper insights into these topics, including expert analysis from Ookla, the WBBA, and Omdia, watch our full webinar!
Global Broadband Trends
The demand for high-speed broadband continues to surge, with fixed broadband growing at a remarkable rate. Between 2020 and 2023, fixed broadband saw 20% growth compared to just 5% for mobile broadband, and similar growth is projected over the next few years. Three key factors drive this increased demand for gigabit and multi-gigabit connectivity:
Connected devices: The number of connected devices per household typically doubles every five years, with projections showing an average of a staggering 45 devices per household by 2030.
High-bandwidth applications: Modern applications demand increasingly higher speeds, from 50 Mbps for 4K video to 300 Mbps for 8K content, with next-generation XR applications requiring speeds up to 1 Gbps.
Cloud shift: Usage patterns are rapidly evolving from primarily saving files locally to accessing cloud-based services for storage and computing, a transition accelerated by XR and AI applications.
Looking ahead to 2028-2029, about half of all fixed broadband connections worldwide are expected to be gigabit-capable. This shift to fiber networks, which enable both higher speeds and improved latency, is necessary to support these evolving demands.
Fiber Development Index (FDI) Findings
The Fiber Development Index provides unprecedented visibility into global broadband development, analyzing 93 countries across multiple metrics including investment patterns (infrastructure funding, market incentives, regulatory policies) and real-world performance data.
To enable meaningful comparisons between markets at different stages of development, the FDI organizes countries into three distinct clusters:
Cluster One – Advanced Markets: These highly developed fiber broadband markets – such as Singapore, the UAE, and Qatar – demonstrate the impact of strong government support and clear national strategies. Singapore highlights cluster one success stories, with its nationwide fiber initiative.
Cluster Two – Transitioning Markets: Markets with developed broadband infrastructure actively expanding their fiber adoption. France, Chile, Switzerland, Australia, and the Netherlands have all improved their FDI rankings through expanded fiber coverage and improved performance metrics.
Cluster Three – Emerging Markets: Regions with low overall broadband penetration often face fundamental connectivity challenges. However, success stories like Peru, which jumped 11 spots in the FDI rankings, show how targeted investment and regulatory improvements can accelerate development.
This clustering approach shows that successful fiber deployment isn’t only about current performance; it’s also about the trajectory of improvement and the policies enabling that growth. For example, while Switzerland and Hungary show similar fiber penetration rates, Switzerland’s higher FDI ranking reflects its continued investment in core networks – illustrating how infrastructure commitment can shape a country’s development path.
Solutions and Best Practices
Understanding what drives success in leading markets can help guide countries working to close their own digital divides. From Singapore’s comprehensive strategy for fiber deployment to Peru’s improvements in regulatory policy and infrastructure investment, successful countries share a few key characteristics in their regulatory approaches and usage of data-driven decision making:
Effective Regulatory Framework: Leading markets implement detailed national broadband plans with specific targets and timelines. They streamline municipal approvals, promote infrastructure sharing, and provide financial incentives through universal service funds.
Data-Driven Planning: Speedtest Intelligence metrics provide granular data on network performance – including speeds, latency, and jitter, among other KPIs – revealing where networks are underperforming against FCC broadband speed standards. These insights help operators target infrastructure investments for maximum impact.
Market-Specific Strategies: Success looks different across markets. For example, while Singapore pursues its nationwide 10-gigabit fiber service, other countries are focused on expanding basic fiber coverage. Speedtest Intelligence metrics can help countries set realistic goals based on their current development stage.
U.S. Broadband Progress
To see how these global trends and challenges play out in a specific market, the U.S. presents a unique example of broadband development, with significant variations across states in both coverage and performance. In early 2024, the FCC raised its minimum broadband speed standard from 25/3 Mbps (25 download/3 upload) to 100/20 Mbps (100 download/20 upload), setting a higher bar for adequate connectivity.
Speedtest Intelligence data from the first half of 2024 reveals how service providers, regulators, and state governments are both making progress and facing persistent challenges in meeting these new standards.
State Leadership: New Jersey leads the nation with 66.4% of Speedtest users achieving FCC minimum standards of 100 Mbps download speed and 20 Mbps upload speed, followed by Connecticut, North Dakota, and Maryland.
Urban-Rural Divide: The gap between rural and urban connectivity access varies dramatically by state. Washington state in particular shows a stark urban-rural divide, with 61.1% of urban residents having access to the FCC’s minimum broadband standards, compared to just 28.7% of rural residents. Delaware demonstrates more equity, with 69.2% of urban residents and 66.8% of rural residents having access to these same standards.
Infrastructure Challenges: Geographic and terrain factors significantly impact deployment costs and feasibility. States like Alaska face unique challenges with frozen ground and vast distances between population centers, making traditional fiber deployment particularly complex and expensive. Data-driven approaches can help identify where alternative solutions might be more practical.
Breaking Down the Digital Divide
Percentage of urban and rural Speedtest users in each state with access to broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps.
To learn more about connectivity performance in U.S. states, check out our recent analyst report looking at broadband speeds across the 50 states.
Future Outlook
The path toward closing the digital divide requires a multi-faceted approach that combines strategic infrastructure investments, supportive regulatory policies, and data-driven decision making. While fiber remains the gold standard for future-proof connectivity, a hybrid approach incorporating fixed wireless access and satellite technology may offer interim solutions for challenging deployments.
Looking ahead, the industry faces several key developments:
Accelerating Gigabit Adoption: The shift from basic broadband to gigabit connectivity will continue, with projections showing 50% of connections reaching gigabit speeds by 2029.
Investment Priorities: BEAD funding and similar initiatives worldwide will shape deployment strategies, particularly in underserved areas.
Technology Integration: Markets will likely adopt hybrid approaches, using a mix of fiber, fixed wireless, and satellite technology to ensure complete coverage.
Understanding this evolving landscape requires comprehensive network intelligence. Ookla’s complementary datasets – combining Speedtest’s crowdsourced performance metrics, RootMetrics’ controlled drive testing data, and Downdetector’s service outage monitoring – provide stakeholders with the complete picture needed to make informed decisions about broadband development.
For a deeper dive into global broadband development, including detailed analysis of the Fiber Development Index and expert insights from WBBA and Omdia, watch our full webinar on demand!
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.
