Tag: Network Evolution

Ookla Research™ Articles
| March 9, 2026

5G SA in 2026: Why Latency and Resilience are the New North Stars

Network Evolution

Mobile networks are entering a new phase in 2026. The focus has shifted from headline speed gains to how networks perform under  pressure. Operators and regulators are asking a more practical question: can networks deliver reliable, low-latency, resilient connectivity under real-world stress?

The stakes of that question become clear in high-pressure moments. A packed stadium where thousands of users try to upload video at the same time. A busy city center during peak commuting hours. An industrial facility running latency-sensitive robotics. A regional power outage where mobile networks become the last remaining communications layer. In each case, peak throughput matters less than consistency, responsiveness, and continuity.

5G Standalone (5G SA) sits at the center of the shift toward latency, resilience, and real-world performance. The standalone 5G architecture promises lower latency, stronger quality-of-service controls, and a foundation for 5G Advanced. Yet global rollout remains uneven, monetization remains challenging, and policy debates around resilience and sovereignty are reshaping how telecom infrastructure is governed. The state of 5G SA in 2026 reflects all of those tensions at once. 

For a deeper look at how these forces are playing out globally, watch our on-demand webinar, 5G Standalone in 2026: Global Performance, Monetization Momentum, and the New Era of Infrastructure Sovereignty.

5G SA Is Expanding, but the Global Gap Is Growing

5G Standalone removes the LTE anchor used in non-standalone (NSA) deployments and connects devices directly to a 5G core. That architectural shift reduces signaling overhead and gives operators greater control over latency, traffic management, and quality-of-service enforcement. In practical terms, it enables capabilities such as network slicing, uplink prioritization, and more predictable responsiveness.

Adoption levels, however, vary dramatically by region, and those differences have real performance and competitive consequences. According to Speedtest Intelligence data, China, for instance, has reached roughly 80% 5G SA sample share, reflecting nationwide commercial cores across major operators. India is approaching 50% penetration, though adoption is concentrated within one large operator. 

Meanwhile, the United States is nearing one-third SA share as carriers expand commercialization, while much of Europe remains in the low single digits, as operators continue prioritizing returns on earlier NSA investments.

Several structural factors shape SA adoption:

  • Core deployment complexity: Moving to a standalone core involves integration across cloud infrastructure, vendors, and operations—it is not as simple as switching on new software.
  • Device configuration: Even when handsets are SA-capable, firmware activation and carrier provisioning can delay actual SA usage.
  • Plan migration: Commercial rollout depends on operators actively migrating subscribers onto SA-enabled plans, which does not happen automatically.
  • Spectrum mix and aggregation: The balance between low-band spectrum for coverage and mid-band spectrum for capacity—combined with effective carrier aggregation—determines whether SA delivers meaningful performance gains.

Real-world penetration ultimately depends on how much subscriber traffic actually migrates onto standalone networks. While standalone 5G is clearly expanding, the gap between leading and lagging markets is widening—and that fragmentation will shape competitive dynamics heading into 2026.

Latency Is Where 5G SA Makes Its Most Meaningful Difference

Latency is where the benefits of 5G SA become most visible. Fast download speeds remain critical for everyday experiences like streaming high-resolution video, downloading large files, or loading rich web content. But many emerging and mission-critical applications depend on responsiveness as well—often referred to in technical standards as Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communications (URLLC)— including real-time cloud collaboration, remote control of industrial equipment, interactive gaming, and AR-assisted workflows. In those environments, lower and more consistent latency can matter as much as, or more than, peak throughput.

Globally, 5G SA delivered roughly a 23% reduction in median latency compared with NSA deployments. In some markets, the improvement was even more pronounced:

  • Hong Kong (~43% improvement vs. NSA): The standalone architecture reduced signaling overhead and delivered materially faster multi-server responsiveness.
  • France (~31% improvement vs. NSA): Routing traffic fully through the 5G core improved latency levels and consistency compared with NSA.

Download performance also remained strong on 5G SA, although speed gains often reflect spectrum strategy (i.e., carrier aggregation and mid-band usage) as much as architecture. In Q3 2025, several markets stood out:

  • UAE (~1.2 Gbps median SA download): Aggressive mid-band deployment and strong carrier aggregation pushed median speeds above 1 Gbps.
  • South Korea (>700 Mbps median SA download): Mature 3.5 GHz mid-band deployment continued to deliver strong, sustained throughput.
  • United States (>300 Mbps median SA download): Expanded multi-band standalone rollout translated into steady, measurable download improvements year-over-year.

However, architecture alone does not guarantee superior user experience. Performance outcomes still depend heavily on deployment decisions and optimization. Several factors explain why results can vary across operators and markets:

  • Spectrum mix and coverage balance: Heavy mid-band deployments boost capacity but can struggle indoors without complementary low-band support. Low-band improves reach but limits peak speed.
  • Carrier aggregation strategy: Without effective aggregation and uplink tuning, standalone gains can level off under heavier traffic loads.
  • Core placement and routing efficiency: CDN proximity, User Plane Function placement, and peering strategy directly affect end-to-end latency—sometimes more than radio conditions do.

In some markets, latency to major cloud-hosted services improved significantly under SA, while gaming latency showed little change in Europe. That gap highlights an important reality: improvements in the radio network do not automatically translate into consistent gains across every application unless optimized.

5G SA delivers measurable performance improvements—particularly in latency. The strongest results appear when core architecture, spectrum strategy, and routing decisions are aligned with real-world usage patterns.

Monetization Remains the Central Question

5G SA’s technical case continues to grow stronger: latency improves, uplink performance becomes more predictable, and download speeds increase. Core-level control becomes more granular. But technical progress does not automatically translate into commercial returns. The monetization challenge heading into 2026 varies sharply between consumer and enterprise segments

Consumer Monetization

For most consumers, network architecture is invisible. They notice when streaming buffers, downloads drag, or apps feel sluggish, but they also notice whether their everyday connectivity feels stable or unreliable. Speed matters, but stability and predictability shape trust over time.

5G SA slices or 5QI configurations can support experiences that users already value:

  • Stable uplink performance: Creators uploading high-resolution video or backing up large files expect transfers to complete without mid-stream drops.
  • Reliable hotspot use in congested venues: Travelers tethering laptops in airports or conferences need connections that remain usable under load.
  • Automatic continuity during broadband outages: 5G backup for home Wi-Fi provides tangible value when fiber or cable service fails, and standalone architecture can help operators manage those connections more predictably.

Improved uplink scheduling, congestion management, and quality-of-service controls can enable these outcomes. However, consumers rarely pay a premium specifically for “standalone” architecture. Monetization is typically attached to reliability features, backup services, or tier differentiation rather than to core network branding.

Enterprise Monetization

Enterprise buyers evaluate networks differently. The question is less about peak speed and more about operational impact. When latency spikes disrupt automated workflows or when connectivity drops affect distributed operations, the cost is measurable.

5G SA aligns more directly with enterprise requirements for URLLC, where industrial automation and robotics depend on consistent, predictable responsiveness:

  • Predictable low latency: Industrial automation and robotics depend on consistent responsiveness.
  • Network slicing and traffic isolation: Critical applications require guaranteed resources and separation from general network congestion.
  • Integration with private and hybrid deployments: Enterprises need interoperability with on-prem systems and edge infrastructure.
  • Defined accountability: Service-level guarantees and monitoring matter more than only speed metrics.

Enterprise buyers focus on performance guarantees and operational continuity—not on the underlying network architecture. They pay for performance commitments that protect their operations from outages and instability. In several markets, enterprise deployments are contributing a larger share of 5G revenue growth than consumer plans, particularly in private and hybrid network use cases.

For operators, the question heading into 2026 is how to translate standalone’s technical gains into repeatable revenue streams.

Infrastructure Sovereignty Is Reshaping Telecom Strategy

In 2025, telecom infrastructure was increasingly treated as strategic national infrastructure, alongside energy, transport, and cloud computing. A series of resilience events reinforced that shift. Regional power outages showed how quickly cellular uptime can degrade when grid supply fails. Subsea cable disruptions exposed transport vulnerabilities. Cloud outages demonstrated that software-layer failures can affect network availability even when radio sites remain operational.

Resilience now spans multiple layers:

  • Site-level power autonomy: Backup batteries and generators determine how long networks operate during outages.
  • Transport redundancy: Multi-path routing reduces single points of failure.
  • Core and orchestration reliability: Software resilience affects service continuity.
  • Cloud infrastructure dependencies: Hyperscale outages can cascade into network degradation.

Policy frameworks are evolving accordingly. In Europe, proposals such as the Digital Networks Act emphasize coordination, resilience, and infrastructure security. Cybersecurity reforms are tightening vendor scrutiny, and broader industrial strategies increasingly link telecom policy to AI competitiveness and supply chain stability. Other major markets are pursuing parallel strategies, though with different emphases:

  • China continues integrating domestic AI development with telecom infrastructure, reinforcing alignment between network deployment and national technology priorities.
  • India is accelerating efforts to build local network stack capabilities, reducing reliance on foreign vendors while expanding 5G coverage.
  • The United States remains focused on reshoring initiatives and supply chain security, particularly in core infrastructure and semiconductor ecosystems.
  • Gulf markets are linking AI readiness and national digitization goals to rapid 5G Advanced deployment timelines.

Telecom strategy increasingly intersects with national resilience planning, industrial policy, and long-term economic competitiveness.

5G Advanced Builds on SA—6G Remains Under Scrutiny

5G SA provides the architectural foundation for 5G Advanced, which expands capabilities through software-driven enhancements. Early commercial deployments are emerging across China and parts of the Gulf, with additional announcements expected in 2026.

5G Advanced aims to extend:

  • Stronger uplink performance: As AI tools, cloud collaboration, and content creation generate more upstream traffic, networks need to handle sustained uploads, not just fast downloads, with enhanced carrier aggregation in the uplink
  • Better energy efficiency: Operators face mounting cost and sustainability pressure as traffic grows and networks densify.
  • Deeper automation and analytics: More advanced network intelligence supports faster optimization, fault detection, and capacity planning.

At the same time, 6G discussions are accelerating. Standards work continues, with commercial deployments projected closer to 2030.

However, many operators are still navigating SA migration and monetization challenges. For several regions, 6G may represent an efficiency-driven evolution rather than a headline speed revolution.

The central 6G question may not be peak performance. It may be whether future networks align effectively with a broader ecosystem that now includes hyperscale cloud providers, neutral host operators, private wireless deployments, and non-terrestrial networks.

Tying It All Together

The mobile market heading into 2026 is shaped less by headline speed claims and more by how networks perform in real-world conditions. 5G SA has delivered measurable technical gains, particularly in latency, but commercial and operational outcomes now depend on how effectively operators deploy, optimize, and position those capabilities.

Performance consistency, resilience under disruption, and alignment with enterprise and national infrastructure priorities are increasingly central to how networks are evaluated. The next phase of competition will be determined not just by faster radios, but by how well operators translate architectural progress into durable value.

For a deeper discussion of standalone performance trends, monetization tradeoffs, and the policy shifts shaping 2026, watch the 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.

Network Evolution
Network Resilience
5G SA

About the author

Dave Andersen

Dave Andersen is a Marketing Program Manager at Ookla, where he creates enterprise and consumer content across Ookla’s brands. Dave got his start in the telco space in 2012, producing content for RootMetrics. Dave has a bachelors in marketing from Washington State University and studied creative writing in Oklahoma State’s MFA program.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| February 11, 2026

5G SA, AI Demands, and Network Resilience Will Dominate the Mobile Market in 2026

Network Evolution

Mobile networks are entering a new phase in 2026. The story is no longer limited to coverage expansion or ultra fast download speeds. Operators, regulators, and enterprise buyers are increasingly focused on whether networks can deliver the reliability, responsiveness, and the capacity needed to support new services under real-world conditions—measured not just by download speeds, but by how networks behave under load, during disruptions, and in latency-sensitive use cases.

That shift is happening alongside meaningful changes in network architecture. Standalone 5G (5G SA) is gaining ground in multiple markets, and early 5G Advanced launches are building on SA foundations. Network resilience also is receiving far more scrutiny after a year of high-profile disruption events. At the same time, satellites are taking on a bigger role, from redundancy to direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity.

This article examines what those changes mean for 2026, including where 5G SA is expanding, why resilience has become a priority, how D2D is reshaping coverage assumptions, along with why AI-driven traffic is forcing networks to rethink uplink speed and latency. For a deeper discussion of these trends by Ookla Research’s analyst team, watch our webinar, From 5G SA to D2D and AI: What Ookla’s Analysts Say About the Year Ahead in Mobile.

Standalone 5G Expands, but Progress Varies Sharply by Region

Standalone 5G continues to grow, but the transition from non-standalone (NSA) deployments looks very different depending on the region. Ookla Speedtest data shows that the APAC region still leads global 5G SA deployment and adoption, reaching roughly 33% penetration by Q3 2025. Growth has begun to plateau slightly year-over-year, which suggests slower rollout or slower migration from NSA among existing 5G users, rather than a lack of initial SA capability.

Within APAC, China stands out for the scale and consistency of SA availability. China reached roughly 80% 5G SA sample share in our results, reflecting nationwide commercial SA cores across all major operators rather than limited or city-level deployments. India has also become a meaningful SA market since launching in 2023, though India’s SA growth has been driven largely by a single operator, resulting in rapid uptake but less uniform national availability.

Other regions show progress, but the gap remains large:

  • North America: Incremental SA expansion. North America’s SA penetration climbed to 27% sample penetration in Q3 2025, up from 18% in the previous year, as operators expanded SA on top of existing 5G coverage rather than building new networks from scratch.
  • Japan and South Korea: Cautious migration. Japan and South Korea reached approximately 10% SA penetration at the end of 2025, reflecting cautious migration from mature NSA deployments.
  • Europe: Core transition lag. Europe remains at just over 2% SA penetration, as many operators continue to prioritize returns on earlier NSA investments and delay full core transitions.
  • Gulf region: Early launches, limited scale. The Gulf region is close behind Europe at roughly 1.7%, despite early commercial launches and aggressive public timelines.

Europe and the Middle East still trail in SA penetration, but both regions have accounted for a large share of newer commercial SA deployments in recent months. While adoption remains low today, recent launches indicate that SA is moving from trials to broader commercial rollout in these markets.

5G SA Performance Gains Are Clear—Latency Tells the Story

5G SA performance improvements are visible across multiple metrics, but latency stands out as the most meaningful indicator of what SA enables. Download speeds on SA have reached new highs in several markets. For example, in Q3 2025 the UAE led with a median SA download speed of roughly 1.2 Gbps, followed by South Korea (740 Mbps), and Greece (~500 Mbps). The U.S., which was a leading country on SA speeds in 2024, reached over 318 Mbps median SA download speeds in 2025.

Download speed remains a useful benchmark, but multi-server latency shows the deeper value of SA architecture. Standalone architecture removes reliance on an LTE anchor and reduces signaling overhead, which consistently delivers better latency than NSA. Globally, 5G SA delivered a 23% reduction in median latency compared with 5G NSA. Certain markets recorded even sharper improvements, including:

  • Hong Kong: latency improvement of ~43% vs NSA
  • France: latency improvement of ~31% vs NSA

Latency improved in several markets in 2025. Hong Kong recorded multi-server latency below 17 ms, followed by Macau (19 ms), Singapore (~21 ms), and Switzerland (~23 ms). This latency improvement likely reflects a shorter path between the device and the core network under SA5G.

Standalone 5G provides the architectural foundation for 5G Advanced—the next phase of 5G evolution. 5G Advanced is a software-driven upgrade that expands SA-based capabilities and performance. China has driven early adoption, with a reported 50 million 5G Advanced users in 2025. Operators in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have launched commercial 5G Advanced services or announced availability plans. Trials have expanded across Europe, South America, and Asia, and additional commercial announcements are expected in 2026. In the United States, operators such as T-Mobile have begun positioning nationwide standalone networks as the foundation for future 5G Advanced capabilities, with broader feature enablement expected as standards and device ecosystems mature.

For operators, the central question remains monetization. Consumer monetization of 5G SA features like network slicing remains limited in many markets, while enterprise use cases map more directly to 5G SA and 5G Advanced capabilities. Lower latency, stronger quality-of-service controls, and more predictable performance align more naturally with enterprise and industrial requirements than with everyday consumer usage.

Network Resilience Becomes Both a Policy Priority and a Service Differentiator

Network resilience moved into sharper focus in 2025 after several high-profile disruption events demonstrated how quickly connectivity degrades when power, transport, or cloud dependencies fail. Power outages, subsea cable disruptions, and cloud service failures each exposed different failure modes, but the outcome was the same: mobile availability dropped when users needed it most.

At its core, resilience comes down to two factors: maintaining essential connectivity during unplanned shocks and restoring service quickly once disruption occurs. Analysis of the Iberian Peninsula blackout showed a direct relationship between grid failure and cellular uptime. When power failed, mobile service degraded rapidly, and recovery timelines varied significantly by operator, depending on backup power duration at sites, transport redundancy, and restoration processes.

Resilience challenges extend beyond physical infrastructure. Backup generators and battery autonomy remain critical, but recent cloud outages illustrate how service degradation can originate in software and cloud systems, not just the underlying network. Site-level hardening alone does not prevent outages when orchestration platforms or cloud services fail, turning software reliability into a network availability issue even when radio sites remain powered and functional.

Operators and regulators are responding:

  • Network design and redundancy: Operators are investing in circuit diversity, multi-path design, and improved site-level power autonomy to reduce single points of failure.
  • Resilience as a service feature: Some operators are beginning to treat resilience as a differentiator, bundling it into consumer offerings such as automatic cellular (4G/5G) backup for home Wi-Fi, helping households stay online when the primary broadband connection goes down.
  • Regulatory power requirements: Regulators in several markets are pushing harder on minimum hours of battery autonomy or generator requirements, in some cases scaling requirements by population density or site criticality.

Resilience is no longer a low-profile engineering topic. Indeed, resilience has become part of customer experience, national infrastructure planning, and regulatory oversight.


Direct-to-Device Connectivity Is Moving from Novelty to Commercial Reality

Direct-to-device (D2D) satellite connectivity is moving from early trials toward limited commercial availability. Standard smartphones can now connect directly to satellites without specialized hardware, extending basic connectivity beyond the reach of terrestrial networks.

Early deployments show growing usage. Operators in the United States, along with markets such as Canada and New Zealand, have moved past pilot phases, reporting sustained messaging activity rather than purely emergency use. Several technical and commercial models are developing at the same time, ranging from smartphone-native satellite messaging to operator-partnered satellite services that reuse existing cellular spectrum. Several technical and commercial models are developing at the same time, ranging from smartphone-native satellite messaging to operator-partnered satellite services that reuse existing cellular spectrum.

D2D is unlikely to replace terrestrial mobile networks, but it is reshaping expectations around coverage and resilience. Satellite connectivity increasingly serves as a fallback layer during outages and a coverage extender in hard-to-reach areas, reducing reliance on additional tower builds alone.

AI Is Forcing Networks to Rethink Upload and Latency Requirements

AI-driven applications are starting to change how networks are used. Unlike video streaming, which is overwhelmingly download-heavy, AI interactions generate sustained upstream data and place greater emphasis on responsiveness, shifting network planning priorities toward upload capacity and latency.

Forecast data suggests enterprise AI traffic will continue to grow. Ericsson reports AI-driven traffic trending toward a more symmetrical pattern—approximately 74% download and 26% upload—compared with the historical 90/10 ratio. Current 5G networks in many markets still deliver upload ratios between 6% and 15%, highlighting a growing mismatch between emerging AI demand and existing network configurations.

Latency requirements also become more complex under AI workloads. Basic LLM queries and voice assistants are less sensitive to latency fluctuations, but agentic AI (multi-step AI systems that take actions) and other time-sensitive systems are not.

Current cloud infrastructure latency often averages around 35 ms, which is generally sufficient for many consumer AI interactions. Industrial robotics, AR systems, and autonomous applications introduce tighter responsiveness expectations, where delays can compound across multi-step workflows. These lower-latency requirements are pushing networks toward architectural changes:

  • Standalone 5G adoption: Supporting more consistent, low-latency performance
  • Elastic capacity planning: Accommodating bursty, interaction-driven traffic patterns
  • Edge compute and hybrid inference: Reducing latency by moving processing closer to the user

AI changes both user behavior and network traffic patterns, increasing pressure on uplink capacity, latency targets, and overall capacity planning.

Looking Ahead to 6G

6G discussions are accelerating, but the industry remains cautious. Standards development is underway, with many expecting completion around 2028 and commercial deployments closer to 2030. Spectrum debates are intensifying, and policy moves are starting to shape the direction of future networks, including U.S. focus on the 7 GHz band.

Even with that momentum, the business case for 6G remains under scrutiny, largely because many operators are still working through standalone 5G migration, monetization, and return-on-investment challenges. Operators in several regions are likely to treat 6G less as a hardware refresh cycle and more as a software-driven evolution focused on efficiency, sustainability, and operational improvement.

In that context, the most important 6G question may not be peak performance. The bigger question is whether 6G can align with a broader connectivity ecosystem that increasingly includes:

  • Cloud providers such as AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud
  • Shared in-building wireless operators (“neutral hosts”) that support multiple carriers in venues like airports and stadiums
  • Private wireless networks deployed and managed by enterprises
  • Non-terrestrial networks such as satellite connectivity
  • New competition for the customer relationship beyond traditional mobile operators

Tying it All Together

The 2026 mobile market is being shaped by real infrastructure shifts. Standalone 5G is expanding, latency performance is becoming a higher priority, and early 5G Advanced deployments are building on SA foundations. Network resilience has become a public priority, and satellite connectivity is taking on a larger role that includes direct-to-device services. AI is also changing the profile of demand, pushing networks to rethink uplink planning, latency targets, and edge architecture.

Operators, regulators, and enterprise buyers are no longer judging networks only on download speeds. The conversation has expanded to include uptime, responsiveness, redundancy, and the ability to support new workloads under real-world conditions.

To explore the full discussion, including deeper analyst perspectives and more from the Ookla Analyst team, check out our recent webinar, From 5G SA to D2D and AI: What Ookla’s Analysts Say About the Year Ahead in Mobile.

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.

Network Evolution
5G SA
AI

About the author

Dave Andersen

Dave Andersen is a Marketing Program Manager at Ookla, where he creates enterprise and consumer content across Ookla’s brands. Dave got his start in the telco space in 2012, producing content for RootMetrics. Dave has a bachelors in marketing from Washington State University and studied creative writing in Oklahoma State’s MFA program.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| February 22, 2023

Starlink Resurgence? Speeds Increase in Europe and Oceania

Satellite

Ookla® is back with exciting, fresh data from Q3 and Q4 2022 for SpaceX’s Starlink and Sky Logic in Europe and Oceania, as well as new Starlink markets we haven’t yet featured in our ongoing series on satellite internet. With the FCC greenlighting Amazon’s Project Kuiper and many other exciting satellite developments launching this year, we’re certain all eyes will be on the sky in 2023 as new orbital connectivity options become available for consumers.

This analysis includes Starlink results from six new countries, and data for Starlink and Sky Logic in Europe and Starlink in Oceania. We also examine how Starlink’s internet performance has changed over the past year in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom.

Starlink is mostly speeding up again from Q3 to Q4 2022, but is still slower than a year ago

As Starlink rides the wave of becoming an increasingly popular connectivity option for consumers, we’ve seen the service speed up and then slow down year-over-year in most markets. However, Q4 2022 data shows many countries are experiencing a modest rise in median download speeds when compared to Q3 2022. That’s encouraging for consumers, especially as Starlink hit over 1 million users in Q4 2022, and could be a sign that Starlink seems to be maturing its constellation’s capacity. That’s particularly intriguing as Starlink launches more next-gen satellites, which were first deployed at the tail end of Q4 2022 and will most likely show up in Q1 2023 results.

In Europe, all the countries we evaluated for year-over-year median download speeds were slower for Q4 2022 than Q4 2021 when there were fewer users on each network. Most countries showed between 10-20% slower speeds in Q4 2022 than what users experienced in Q4 2021, including Ireland (at least 11% slower), Austria (at least 13%), Portugal (at least 14%), Italy (at least 15%), Germany (at least 16%), and the U.K. (at least 19%). Users in France saw very similar speeds year over year, with just a 4% decrease from Q4 2021 to Q4 2022, while users in Poland saw a large decrease (at least 56% slower), and users in the Netherlands (at least 21%) and Belgium (at least 28%) saw substantial decrease during the same period.

In Oceania, Starlink year-over-year results were mixed, with Starlink’s download speed in Australia 24% slower in Q4 2022 than during Q4 2021, while in New Zealand it was 4% faster in Q4 2022 than Q4 2021.

Starlink in Denmark and Switzerland had the fastest satellite internet in Europe during Q4 2022

Speedtest Intelligence® reveals there was no fastest satellite provider in Europe during Q4 2022, though Starlink in Denmark (147.52 Mbps) and Switzerland (136.03 Mbps) led the pack for fastest median download speed. In all, Starlink download speeds were faster than 100 Mbps in 10 out of 15 European countries during Q4 2022 — a rise from just five out 15 in Q3 2022. 

Starlink outperformed fixed broadband providers over download speed in eight countries, including: Austria (105.67 Mbps), Belgium (104.84 Mbps), Croatia (102.99 Mbps), Czechia (64.67 Mbps), Germany (94.37 Mbps), Ireland (103.39 Mbps), Italy (101.06 Mbps), and the U.K. (96.79 Mbps). Fixed broadband providers were faster than satellite providers analyzed in Denmark, France, Netherlands, and Poland. Results were too close to call in Sweden with fixed providers at 106.73 Mbps and Starlink at 101.83 Mbps, as well as Portugal with Starlink at 108.02 Mbps and fixed broadband at 117.97 Mbps. Skylogic was too close to call between the median fixed broadband speed in Italy at 55.50 Mbps to 59.40 Mbps, and had download speeds faster than 40 Mbps in France (44.46 Mbps) and Sweden (48.09 Mbps).

For upload speeds, every country’s combined fixed broadband providers had faster median upload speeds than every satellite provider, though Starlink in Portugal had the fastest upload speed among satellite providers at 20.86 Mbps. All Starlink upload speeds ranged between 10-20 Mbps except Poland (9.79 Mbps) and Denmark (8.04 Mbps). 

Multi-server latency for all satellite providers was higher than fixed broadband providers in every European country in Q4 2022, which ranged from 12.34 ms in Sweden to 23.46 ms in Italy. However, Starlink had a median multiserver latencies of less than 60 ms in the U.K. (53.24 ms), Portugal (56.81 ms), and the Netherlands (58.85 ms). Most latencies were between 60-75 ms, with Poland having the highest latency at 86.46 ms — still low enough to have a good quality of experience and be able to video chat.

Starlink in New Zealand was the fastest satellite provider in Oceania

During Q4 2022, Starlink in New Zealand had the fastest median download speed among satellite providers in Oceania at 124.72 Mbps, followed by Starlink in Australia (106.43 Mbps), and Starlink in Tonga (35.15 Mbps). However, New Zealand fixed broadband outperformed Starlink, while Starlink in Australia outperformed fixed broadband providers. In Tonga, speeds were too close to call. 

Speedtest Intelligence shows Starlink falling behind fixed broadband providers for median upload speeds in New Zealand (16.89 Mbps) and Australia (11.38 Mbps), while Tonga was again too close to call.

Multi-server latency was higher over Starlink than fixed broadband in all three countries we surveyed in Oceania during Q4 2022. However, Starlink’s median latency was under 50 ms in New Zealand (48.11 ms), which is a very exciting development for consumers, especially with latency becoming an increasingly important metric. Starlink latency in Australia was higher at 65.52 ms, while Tonga followed at 88.81 ms.

New Q4 2022 Starlink countries show very promising results

Speedtest Intelligence shows the six new countries where we found new Starlink data are off to a roaring start in Q4 2022, which include Bulgaria, Finland, Jamaica, Japan, Latvia, and Malta. Starlink had faster median download speeds than the country’s respective fixed broadband providers combined in two countries: Bulgaria (110.76 Mbps versus 65.69 Mbps), and Jamaica (87.43 Mbps vs. 48.34 Mbps), while results were too close to call in the remaining four markets. However, Starlink showed promising 100+ Mbps speeds in Japan (156.94 Mbps), Finland (102.70 Mbps), and Malta (101.36 Mbps). 

Median upload speeds for Starlink lagged behind fixed broadband providers in all markets, though Malta was too close to call (20.40 Mbps for Starlink and 20.25 Mbps for fixed broadband). Starlink upload speeds ranged from about 14 Mbps to 20 Mbps in every market.

Consumers and enterprises stand to benefit from satellite developments in 2023

Starlink dominated headlines in 2022 — and for good reason. They’ve gained over 1 million users worldwide, will be available in connected vehicles, planes, RVs, and ships, partnered with T-Mobile to bring Starlink to mobile devices, and launched their second-gen satellites at the end of 2022. But that could very seriously change in 2023 with multiple competitors deploying major offensives in the satellite market. We’ll say it again: there is a new space race for connectivity being waged, and we’re just at the tip of what’s to come.

Here are some major updates about what’s next for various different satellite competitors:

Amazon’s Project Kuiper approved by the FCC

The biggest news concerning satellite connectivity is the FCC approving Amazon’s Project Kuiper constellation, which will include 3,236 satellites in an LEO array. On two fronts, this poses two potential challenges for Starlink: on one hand, Amazon has the global reach, scale, and consumer base that being one of the largest companies in the world provides. On the other, Blue Origin is a direct competitor of SpaceX, and won’t have to rely on the service or other vendors to launch their array into space. Amazon is in a good position to compete and Project Kuiper could become a major player if their prototypes, which will be launched in early 2023, reach speeds anywhere close to competing with broadband internet. 

Viasat set to launch Viasat-3 arrays around April 8, 2023

Long-term incumbent satellite internet provider, Viasat, has a big year ahead after years of planning and providing connectivity to remote locations around the world. Viasat is finally set to launch its Viasat-3 array, which aims to provide 1 Terabit per second (Tbps) of network capacity on each satellite, allowing its users to experience 100+ Mbps connections; that’s a huge improvement for the mainly GEO provider. While consumers likely won’t see these results until Q4 2023, we’re very excited to see how Viasat improves its network.

Eutelsat’s merger with OneWeb approved by Eutelsat board, second-gen array being planned

One of the biggest mergers in recent years among satellite providers has jumped a major hurdle and was approved by the Eutelsat board. While the combined entities still have to be approved by shareholders and regulators, this merger could expand both companies’ market share, particularly in India, which has fast become an important satellite market. Furthermore, OneWeb is already planning a second-gen satellite, which they’re aiming to launch in 2025.

European Commission forges ahead on Constellation Iris

The European Union has been working to create its own satellite constellation since 2020, and during November 2022, agreed to a plan to commit €2.4 billion for a third satellite array named Iris, in addition to Galileo and Copernicus. The project, which includes GEO, MEO, and LEO arrays, will help support EU connectivity priorities including the economy, environment, security, and defense, and is hoping to launch in 2024, and be fully operational by 2027.

HughesNet aiming to launch Jupiter 3 array in H1 2023

Incumbent satellite internet provider HughesNet is planning to launch its new Jupiter 3 array in the first half of 2023, which will help expand its network capacity, “doubling the size of the Hughes JUPITER fleet over North and South America.” While the Jupiter 3 array will still be a GEO constellation, the added network capacity will alleviate congested networks and give consumers more bandwidth to use the internet.

Ookla will continue monitoring new satellite internet developments

As 2023 continues to shape up as a pivotal year for satellite internet providers, we’ll be watching the sky to make sure providers are providing the connectivity consumers need. We’ll continue our series next quarter with Q4 2022 and Q1 2023 data from North and South America and any new countries where Starlink launches, and be back with Europe and Oceania data in Q3 2023. In the meantime, be sure to download the Speedtest® app for Windows and Mac computers or for iOS or Android for devices and see how your satellite internet stacks up to our findings.

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.

Satellite
Network Evolution

About the author

Josh Fomon

Josh was a senior content specialist at Ookla.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| August 4, 2021

How Starlink’s Satellite Internet Stacks Up Against HughesNet and Viasat around the Globe

Satellite

The satellite internet race is heating up, with more competitors serving more areas than even a quarter ago. We’re back with a broader look at internet network performance for satellite providers across the globe based on Q2 2021 data from Speedtest Intelligence™.

Starlink speeds beat competitors in the U.S., can’t top fixed broadband

Given that satellite internet is often the only solution for folks with little to no fixed broadband access, the Speedtest® results we saw coming from HughesNet, Starlink and Viasat during Q2 2021 were encouraging. However, Starlink was the only satellite internet provider in the United States with fixed-broadband-like latency figures, and median download speeds fast enough to handle most of the needs of modern online life at 97.23 Mbps during Q2 2021 (up from 65.72 Mbps in Q1 2021). HughesNet was a distant second at 19.73 Mbps (15.07 Mbps in Q1 2021) and Viasat third at 18.13 Mbps (17.67 Mbps in Q1 2021). None of these are as fast as the 115.22 Mbps median download speed for all fixed broadband providers in the U.S. during Q2 2021, but it beats digging twenty miles (or more) of trench to hook up to local infrastructure.

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_us_0821

Starlink’s median upload speed of 13.89 Mbps (up from 13.77 Mbps in Q1 2021) was much closer to that on fixed broadband (17.18 Mbps in Q2 2021, 15.99 Mbps in Q1 2021). Viasat had the second fastest upload speed among satellite providers at 3.38 Mbps (3.48 in Q1 2021). HughesNet was third (2.43 Mbps in Q1 and Q2 2021).

Critically, Starlink was the only satellite internet provider with a median latency that was anywhere near that seen on fixed broadband in Q2 2021 (45 ms and 14 ms, respectively). A low latency connection is more responsive, making it essential for many common applications such as voice and video calling, gaming and live streaming of content. Starlink is able to achieve these lower latency numbers through the use of their low earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellation. At altitudes between 550-1200 km, these satellites are physically closer to the earth’s surface than traditional satellite providers. Therefore it takes less time for the signal to relay back to a downlink station on earth, ensuring a much more responsive connectivity experience for the user. Viasat and HughesNet both utilize considerably higher “geosynchronous” orbits of around 35,000 km for their satellites. This allows them to serve much wider swaths of the Earth’s surface with fewer satellites, but with a dramatic increase in latency in our data of 630 ms and 724 ms respectively.

Satellite internet speeds in the U.S. are increasing, mostly

Consumers are used to incremental increases in fixed broadband performance as that’s a developed technology with a stable market share. Satellite internet is newer and speeds fluctuate as technologies improve and as more users are added to sometimes crowded networks. Data from Speedtest Intelligence during Q1-Q2 2021 shows some of these struggles as median download speeds for both Starlink and HughesNet dipped in February and then rose again through the period only to dip again in June. This could be related to seasonal weather patterns. Viasat’s median download speed rose slightly from January through April and then started to decline slightly in May and June. We’ll continue watching the performance of these companies over time to see if they reach the steady climb that fixed broadband enjoys.

ookla_satellite_internet_monthly_comparison_us_0821

Starlink performance varies at the county level, but not widely

We saw sufficient samples during Q2 2021 to analyze Starlink performance in 458 counties in the U.S. While there was about a 100 Mbps range in performance between the county with the fastest median download speed (Morgan County, Alabama at 168.30 Mbps) and the county with the slowest median download speed (Madison County, Indiana at 64.51 Mbps), even the lower-end speeds are well above the FCC’s Baseline performance tier of at least a 25 Mbps download speed. We also saw many more counties qualify for analysis during Q2 2021 than we saw in Q1 2021.

ookla_united_states_download_speeds_starlink_map_0821

Satellite internet performance elsewhere in the world

The ambition and potential of satellite internet providers is of course to increase internet access across the globe. To that end, we examined satellite internet performance in countries with an established market share.

Brazil: Viasat download speed is comparable to fixed broadband, upload is not

Viasat’s 60.30 Mbps median download speed during Q2 2021 in Brazil was very close to the national average for fixed broadband of 61.38 Mbps. Viasat’s median upload speed (1.05 Mbps) was much slower, however, than that on fixed broadband (28.75 Mbps), and Viasat’s latency was much higher (613 ms vs 7 ms).

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_br_0821

Canada: Starlink beats fixed broadband download speeds

Our previous article showed that Starlink’s median download speed was slower than fixed broadband in three provinces and faster in two. Data from Q2 2021 shows that Starlink’s median download speed exceeded that of fixed broadband in Canada (86.92 Mbps vs. 84.24 Mbps), making Starlink a reasonable alternative to fixed broadband in Canada. Starlink’s median upload speed was slower than fixed broadband (13.63 Mbps vs. 17.76 Mbps). Latency on Starlink was much higher (55 ms vs. 12 ms), but many customers in remote areas would gladly accept a latency in that range in exchange for having access to internet service.

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_ca_0821

Starlink performance varies at the province level, but not widely

Starlink showed enough samples to analyze performance in 8 provinces in Canada during Q2 2021. Starlink’s Q2 2021 median download speed was faster than fixed broadband in five provinces (Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec and Saskatchewan), though samples in Nova Scotia were few enough and showed enough variability that there is room for interpretation. Download speeds were comparable between Starlink and overall fixed broadband in two provinces (Alberta and Ontario) and fixed broadband was faster in British Columbia.

ookla_canada_download_speeds_starlink_map_0821

Chile: HughesNet shows comparable speeds here and in the U.S.

At 15.43 Mbps, the median download speed for HughesNet in Chile during Q2 2021 was not fast, especially compared with the country’s fixed broadband average of 111.94 Mbps. Median upload speeds also showed a wide gap (3.23 Mbps for HughesNet to 39.48 Mbps on fixed broadband), and HughesNet’s latency was very high (678 ms vs. 8 ms).

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_cl_0821

Colombia: HughesNet is slowest

The slowest performance we saw for HughesNet was in Colombia, where fixed broadband speeds are also slower than in other countries surveyed. HughesNet showed a median download speed of 9.28 Mbps during Q2 2021, compared with Colombia’s 35.90 Mbps for fixed broadband overall. Median upload speed was also slower using the satellite internet provider (3.03 Mbps) than fixed broadband (8.56 Mbps), and latency was much higher on satellite (799 ms vs. 17 ms).

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_co_0821

France: Where the fastest Starlink download speeds are

Satellite internet users in France saw the fastest median download speeds from Starlink of all countries we surveyed during Q2 2021. At 139.39 Mbps, Starlink’s download speed easily beat the country-wide average for fixed broadband of 70.81 Mbps. Starlink’s upload speed was slower than the fixed broadband average, but still respectable (29.35 Mbps vs. 52.56 Mbps), and Starlink’s latency was higher (53 ms vs. 13 ms).

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_fr_0821

Germany: Starlink far surpasses local fixed broadband

Consumers looking for fast internet in Germany have a great option in Starlink. Starlink’s median download and upload speeds were much faster than the country averages for fixed broadband in Q2 2021. The only drawback is Starlink’s 37 ms latency, compared to the 15 ms average for fixed broadband.

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_de_0821

Mexico: Viasat and HughesNet are comparable, though slower than fixed broadband

Mexico has options when it comes to satellite internet, and the faster of the two options appears to be Viasat, for now. With a median download speed of 13.95 Mbps in Mexico during Q2 2021, Viasat was faster than HughesNet (11.92 Mbps) but slower than the country’s average for fixed broadband (29.99 Mbps). Median upload speed told a similar story, though HughesNet was slightly faster than Viasat (3.25 Mbps vs. 2.01 Mbps). While Viasat’s latency was high (672 ms vs 13 ms for fixed broadband), it was lower than HughesNet’s (714 ms).

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_mx_0821

New Zealand: Starlink is faster than fixed broadband

Data from Speedtest Intelligence shows that Starlink’s median download speed was much faster than New Zealand’s average fixed broadband download speed during Q2 2021 (127.02 Mbps vs. 78.85 Mbps), and the upload speeds were nearly identical (23.61 Mbps vs. 23.51 Mbps). Starlink did have a much higher latency (101 ms vs. 7 ms). Starlink is relatively new in the country and does not have a large market share yet; we’ll be interested to see how their speeds hold up under heavier use.

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_nz_0821

United Kingdom: Starlink beats fixed broadband providers

Starlink showed a much faster median download speed in the U.K. during Q2 2021 (108.30 Mbps) than the country’s average for fixed broadband (50.14 Mbps). Starlink’s upload speed was also slightly faster (15.64 Mbps vs. 14.76 Mbps), and the latency was pretty good, given the distance traveled (37 ms vs. 15 ms). This brings Starlink closer to contender status for consumers across the U.K., not just those stranded in internet-free zones in Northern Scotland, once the service interruptions are under control. It also shows that because satellite internet is not constrained by the infrastructure of a given country, there is the potential to radically outperform fixed broadband.

ookla_satellite_internet_comparison_uk_0821

This data is changing rapidly as satellite internet providers launch new service locations and improve their technology. We’ll be excited to see if Starlink is still the satellite provider to beat next quarter and in what other countries satellite internet provides a viable alternative to fixed broadband.

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.

Satellite
Network Evolution

About the author

Isla McKetta

Isla was the first content manager at Ookla, working her way up to Sr. Director of Consumer Marketing in her 8+ years with the company.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| November 17, 2025

WISP Report Card: Data Shows Most Fail FCC’s 100/20 Mbps Benchmark

Network Evolution

Wireless ISPs face a growing threat from LEO satellite providers like Starlink that can reach rural users with faster download speeds.

There are around 2,000 U.S. wireless internet service providers (WISPs) and about nine million Americans get their internet service from these companies, according to the Wireless ISP Association (WISPA).  Many of these WISPs are very small and provide service to just a few hundred customers. 

WISPs have become more prevalent over the past few years largely due to the introduction of vendor equipment that makes it possible to more cost-effectively deliver better coverage using unlicensed spectrum and commercial off-the-shelf hardware.

WISPs deliver their services using fixed wireless access (FWA) but they tend to be smaller and focused on certain markets such as rural areas or apartment complexes than the large telcos like Verizon, T-Mobile or AT&T, which also use FWA technology to deliver broadband services across the country. However, unlike the WISPs, these operators don’t consider broadband to be their primary business. 

Using Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence® data, we examined the performance of eight of the larger U.S. WISPs—Etheric Networks, GeoLinks, NextLink Internet, Resound Networks, Rise Broadband, Starry, Unwired Broadband, and Wisper Internet — from Q1 2021 through Q2 2025. For those providers that offer both FWA and fiber, we categorized users with upload speeds under 100 Mbps as FWA customers to distinguish them from fiber users. While all eight of the WISPs that we monitored improved their median download speeds during that time period, their performance varies greatly. 

Key Takeaways

  • Starry, which is being acquired by Verizon, delivered the highest median download speeds (202.25 Mbps in Q2 2025) of all eight U.S. WISPs that we studied. 
  • GeoLinks delivered the slowest median download speeds (22.74 Mbps in Q2 2025) of the WISPs we reviewed. Its users in the 75th percentile (those in the upper end of the typical speed range) experienced download speeds of 56.58 Mbps in Q2 2025.  We measured GeoLinks customers in its California markets where the company currently uses an older platform on 5 GHz spectrum.
  • Because of Starry’s faster speeds, the WISP was able to deliver the FCC’s minimum requirement for broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps to 66.88% of Speedtest users in Q2 2025. 
  • WISPs face a growing threat from low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite providers like Starlink, which can reach rural users with download speeds that are often faster than WISPs. 
  • To continue to compete  in the broadband space, WISPs need to find ways to secure more spectrum to avoid network congestion and interference.

The Many Flavors of WISPs

The performance of WISPs in the U.S. is under scrutiny right now because of recent changes that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) made to the Broadband Equity and Deployment (BEAD)  program. In June 2025 the NTIA revamped BEAD to provide a technology-neutral approach and prioritize cost-per-location.This means that instead of favoring fiber, other technologies such as low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite and FWA can compete with fiber for BEAD funding. The revisions also include a rule to ensure that bids go to the lowest-cost bidders.

States revised their BEAD applications and re-submitted them using the new guidance. Early indications are that many states plan to use FWA for at least a portion of their BEAD eligible locations. Connected Nation, a non-profit that monitors the digital divide, found that states have awarded 11.7% of eligible locations to FWA providers, and many of those FWA providers are categorized as wireless ISPs (WISPs). 

We analyzed the performance of eight of the largest U.S. WISPs over several quarters from Q1 2021 until Q2 2025. However, it’s important to note that all of these companies vary greatly in terms of their spectrum holdings, their business models, their coverage areas, and their vendor equipment, which drives a large variance in performance outcomes. 

Nevertheless, it’s notable that all eight of the WISPs we monitored improved their median download speeds during that time period. They also improved their median upload speeds, but to a much lesser extent. 

Starry outpaced all the others and recorded the highest median download speeds. In Q2 2025 Starry’s median download speed was 202.25 Mbps, which is more than double that of the Resound Networks with a median download speed of 99.41 Mbps in Q2 2025. Starry also was nearly nine times higher in median download speeds than the slowest of the eight WISPs, GeoLinks, which had a median download speed of just 22.74 Mbps in Q2 2025. 

A Comparison of WISPs Median Download and Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
A comparison of WISPs median download and upload speed over time.

The eight WISPs and their coverage areas

NameStates where WISP operatesSpectrum used
Etheric NetworksCalifornia2.4 MHz, 5.8 GHz unlicensed and 28 GHz licensed
GeoLinksCalifornia, Arizona, and Nevadaunlicensed 5 GHz, LMDS 29-31 GHz spectrum, unlicensed 59-71 GHz spectrum
NextLinkTexas, Oklahoma, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska2.4 MHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz
Resound Networks

Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas6 GHz unlicensed, 5 GHz unlicensed, and 3.65 GHz licensed
Rise Broadband16 states including Colorado, Nebraska, Illinois, Iowa, Texas and Southern Wisconsin unlicensed 5 GHz, unlicensed 3.65 GHz, licensed 2.5 GHz, and some TV white space spectrum at 470-698 MHz
Starry BroadbandMajor cities such as Boston, Denver, Los Angeles, New York City and Washington, DC37 GHz licensed, 24 GHz licensed, some 5 GHz unlicensed
Unwired BroadbandCalifornia unlicensed 6 GHz
Wisper WirelessOklahoma, Kansas, Indiana, and Illinois 3.5 GHz (CBRS), 5.1 GHz, and maybe 6 GHz

Most WISPs struggle to deliver the FCC’s minimum broadband speeds to their customers 

All of the eight WISPs use a different configuration of spectrum licenses. Most are reliant upon some combination of low-, mid-, or high-band licensed and unlicensed spectrum. In addition, many have deployed fiber either as an alternative to their FWA service or to use to carry backhaul or middle-mile traffic. 

While using unlicensed spectrum means that a WISP can launch services quickly without having to purchase costly spectrum licenses, it also means that congestion and interference can result in the WISP having to carefully manage demand for their services. 

Using Speedtest data collected in Q2 2025 we compared the median download and upload speeds of the eight WISPs to determine what percentage of their Speedtest users were receiving the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream).   

Starry, which has mmWave spectrum licenses and uses proprietary equipment, is able to provide the FCC’s minimum standard for broadband to the highest percentage of users at 66.9%.  In contrast Rise Broadband, which primarily operates with unlicensed spectrum in the 5 GHz band and in the 3.55 GHz to 3.7 GHz bands (CBRS), but also uses some licensed spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band, is able to provide the FCC’s minimum requirement for broadband to just 6.7% of its users. 

WISPs% of Speedtest users achieving wireless broadband speeds of 100/20 Mbps
Starry66.9%
Resound Networks41.5%
Wisper Internet 26.0%
NextLink 24.4%
Unwired 21.8%
GeoLinks8.7%
Etheric 8.4%
Rise Broadband 6.7%

mmWave’s bigger pipe doesn’t always equal faster speeds

Starry, GeoLinks and Etheric all use some combination of high-band spectrum to deliver their FWA services. The benefits of this spectrum is it can deliver faster speeds and carry bandwidth-intensive applications. But it also requires line-of-sight or near-line-of-sight to work because of potential interference from buildings, trees, and even rain. 

Among the three providers that use mmWave spectrum we saw dramatic differences with Starry significantly outperforming GeoLinks and Etheric, which suggest that Starry has a greater penetration of mmWave spectrum among its customer base that is benefitting the WISP. 

Starry

Starry uses a proprietary technology with base stations that cover a radius of about one mile and its system operates on shared spectrum licenses in the 37.1, 37.3 and 37.5 GHz mmWave bands. It also acquired 104 licenses in the 24 GHz band that cover 51 partial economic areas. 

The company targets large apartment buildings with its service. Its setup consists of a rooftop base station that broadcasts a signal to multiple building-mounted receivers, allowing a single base station to serve dozens of buildings. Although it uses proprietary equipment it’s based upon modified 802.11ac/ax standards that takes advantage of the Wi-Fi chipset ecosystem.

The company, which is currently being acquired by Verizon, offers service to about 100,000 subscribers in apartment buildings in five markets; Boston, Denver, Los Angeles, New York/New Jersey, and Washington, D.C./Virginia.

Starry offers a variety of rate plans: $30 per month for up to 200 Mbps; $55 per month for up to 500 Mbps; and $75 per month for up to 1 Gbps. 

Ookla’s Speedtest® data shows that Starry has nearly doubled its median download speeds in its markets from 102.74 Mbps in Q1 2022 to 202.25 Mbps in Q2 2025. The company’s upload speed also increased, but not as dramatically from 52.29 Mbps in Q1 2022 to 54.34 Mbps in Q2 2025.  The company saw the biggest increase in speeds from Q1 2024 to Q2 2025, which is likely due to some network upgrades, including the deployment of the 2.0 version of its Comet receiver.  Starry said the upgrades would expand its coverage range as well as provide better spectral efficiency.  

Starry's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Starry's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

GeoLinks uses local multipoint distribution services (LMDS) spectrum that it acquired from Verizon in 2021 as well as some unlicensed 5 GHz and unlicensed 59-61 GHz spectrum. Those 208 LMDS licenses are in the 29/31 GHz bands and cover several markets. However, GeoLinks currently offers service primarily in California and has a few deployments in Arizona and Nevada, but our Speedtest data samples were all collected from the company’s California deployment where it is currently using the unlicensed 5 GHz spectrum and an older platform.. 

The company recently tested Intracom Telecom’s point-to-multipoint equipment to demonstrate multi-gigabit FWA using its 29/31GHz mmWave spectrum. In addition, it has indicated that it is interested in leasing its spectrum to other enterprises and operators that can then use its spectrum holdings to develop their own FWA services. 

GeoLinks offers a variety of price plans: $25.99 per month for speeds of 10/10 Mbps; $38.99 per month for 25/10 Mbps; $45.99 per month for 30/30 Mbps; and $69.99 per month for speeds of 100/25 Mbps. The company’s web site indicates that the $45.99 per month plan that delivers 30/30 Mbps is the most popular plan with its customers. 

Speedtest data shows Geolinks delivering median download speeds of just 22.74 Mbps in Q2 2025 with 75th percentile download speeds of 56.58 Mbps. Its users experience median upload speeds of 19.82 Mbps in Q2 2025.  

GeoLink's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
GeoLink's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

Etheric Networks

Etheric Networks provides FWA service to the California Bay Area. The company has a fiber ring stretching from San Francisco to Monterey, California that connects its FWA towers and eight data centers. Etheric uses a mix of spectrum including unlicensed 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz spectrum. However, in 2024 Etheric partnered with BroadbandOne to leverage BroadbandOne’s 28 GHz mmWave spectrum. The company said this partnership will allow it to enhance its connectivity and serve more rural and agricultural areas. 

The company offers three residential price plans: $79 per month for speeds up to 100 Mbps; $99 per month for speeds up to 250 Mbps and $169 per month for 1 Gbps speeds. 

Speedtest data shows Etheric has nearly doubled its median download speeds from 21.34 Mbps in Q1 2021 to 41.09 Mbps in Q2 2025. Its users in the 75th percentile (those in the upper end of the typical speed range) saw speeds of 65.45 Mbps in Q2 2025.The company’s median upload speeds also increased over time from 13.6 Mbps in Q1 2021 to 29.5 Mbps in Q2 2025. 

Etheric Networks' Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Etheric Networks' median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

WISPs make the most of mid-band with CBRS licenses

Many WISPs take advantage of the mid-band CBRS spectrum, which is a 150 MHz shared spectrum in the 3.5 GHz to 3.7 GHz band that allows for flexible use by three different groups that are managed by a Spectrum Access System (SAS). The SAS can dynamically grant access to different users. The band is shared by these three parties: incumbent users such as the U.S. Navy that have priority access to the band; licensed users with Priority Access Licenses (PAL) that have exclusive use of a portion of the band in a specific geographic location; and the General Authorized Access (GAA) group who can access the spectrum but have no protection from interference from the other two groups.  

Several of the WISPs we analyzed deploy their services in the CBRS spectrum and primarily use the GAA portion of the band. Others have acquired CBRS PAL and some use a combination of both. Some WISPS also use unlicensed bands such as 5 GHz. 

Nextlink spent $28.4 million in FCC’s Auction 105 to purchase over 1,100 CBRS PAL licenses covering 491 counties in eleven states including Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, Wyoming, and Missouri. The company uses that spectrum to deliver its FWA service to its more than 100,000 subscribers (as of August 2025).  NextLink also has deployed fiber to more than 100,000 locations and has 20,000 fiber customers. 

Nextlink secured Connect America Fund II funding and participated in the FCC’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund so much of its FWA expansion has been driven by those commitments. In August Nextlink said it has completed five of the six states as part of its CAF II funding and is halfway through its RDOF buildout. 

The company offers a variety of FWA plans: The Next50, which offers up to 50 Mbps speeds for $30 per month; the Next100 that offers speeds up to 100 Mbps for $40 per month; The Next300 that offers speeds up to 300 Mbps for $60 per month; and the Next500 that offers speeds up to 500 Mbps for $75 per month. 

Speedtest data shows NextLink has more than tripled its median download speeds from 19.45 Mbps in Q1 2021 to 68.47 Mbps in Q2 2025.  The WISP also increased its median upload speeds significantly from 4.72 Mbps in Q1 2021 to 18.26 Mbps in Q2 2025. NextLink users in the 75th percentile (those in the upper end of the typical speed range) get much higher speeds of 122.88 Mbps in Q2 2025. 

NextLink's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
NextLink's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

Resound Networks

Resound Networks provides FWA service in Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, Arizona and Oklahoma and uses Tarana Wireless gear in the unlicensed 5 GHz and 6 GHz spectrum bands. It also offers fiber service in some locations and is planning to expand its fiber footprint. Like many WISPs, Resound is focused specifically on rural communities that have historically been overlooked by larger ISPs. In 2022 the company was awarded $303 million through the FCC’s RDOF program to deliver FWA and fiber to 214,000 rural locations. 

Resound offers both residential and enterprise rate plans. Its residential plans start at 75 Mbps for $55 per month and go up to 1 Gbps for $130 per month. 

The company’s customers experienced a steady increase in their download and upload speeds from mid-2023 until Q2 2025 from a median download speed of 38.94 Mbps in Q3 2023 to 99.41 Mbps in Q2 2025.  Its users in the 75th percentile (those in the upper end of the typical speed range) experienced an even greater climb in download speeds from 62.99 Mbps in Q3 2023 to 190.76 Mbps in Q2 2025.  During this time period Resound was expanding its network. 

Resound Network's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Resound's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

Rise Broadband

Rise Broadband claims to be the country’s largest WISP with around 200,000 customers. It may also be one of the longest living WISPs because it dates back to 2006 when it started as JAB Broadband and its goal was to consolidate many of the country’s smaller WISPs to create one big WISP with a large footprint. 

Today Rise offers FWA service in16 states, mostly in the Midwest. Rise offers service primarily in rural areas and it uses a mix of unlicensed spectrum in the 5 GHz band and in the 3.55 GHz to 3.7 GHz bands (CBRS), but also uses some licensed spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band, to deliver its service. 

Like NextLink, the company is actively deploying fiber in addition to FWA. The company’s strategy is to deploy FWA initially to capture market share and then roll out fiber to the densest FWA coverage areas. 

Rise’s price plans start as low as $30 per month for 50 Mbps and reach up to 400 Mbps for $55 per month. 

Rise users logged median download speeds of 42.58 Mbps in Q2 2025, which is a significant jump from Q1 2021 when users experienced median download speeds of just 16.01 Mbps. Rise’s users  in the 75th percentile (those in the upper end of the typical speed range) were able to achieve download speeds of 65.97 Mbps in Q2 2025.  The company’s median upload speeds also increased from 4.05 Mbps in Q1 2021 to 18.38 Mbps Q2 2025. Rise saw a big jump in median upload speeds between Q2 2022 when users logged median upload speeds of 5.86 Mbps and Q3 2022 when users experienced median upload speeds of 13.68 Mbps. 

Rise Broadband's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Rise Broadband's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

Wisper Internet

Wisper Internet offers FWA in six midwestern states including Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Indiana. The company uses unlicensed spectrum in the 5 GHz, and a mix of unlicensed and licensed spectrum in the 2.5 GHz and 3.65 GHz bands.  Like NextLink and Rise, the company also has deployed fiber in a few select areas. 

Wisper offers a variety of rate plans including 25 Mbps for $70 per month; 50 Mbps for $75 per month; 100 Mbps for $80 per month; 200 Mbps for $110 per month and 400 Mbps for $140 per month. 

Similar to the other WISPs, Wisper’s median download speeds increased over time but it increased dramatically from Q3 2023 to Q2 2025 when its median download speeds increased from 33.74 Mbps to 52.90 Mbps. Likewise, the download speeds for users in the 75th percentile also increased, climbing from 55.12 Mbps in Q3 2023 to 107.90 Mbps in Q2 2025. This jump in speeds was likely due to  Wisper’s deployment of additional FWA gear from Tarana Wireless on 180 more towers in its footprint. 

Wisper Internet's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Wisper Internet's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

Unwired

Unwired Broadband provides FWA coverage in rural and underserved areas in central and northern California. The company said it has a network of more than 200 towers and a coverage area of about 17,000 square miles. Besides FWA, Unwired also provides some fiber service but It’s early in its deployment process. 

Unwired uses a combination of licensed and unlicensed spectrum to deliver its FWA service, including the licensed 2.5 GHz band and the unlicensed 6 GHz band. 

The company offers both business and residential FWA service and its pricing starts at $59.99 per month for 100 Mbps. 

Unwired users experienced increases in download and upload speeds over time but between Q3 2024 and Q4 2024 the jump was more dramatic. Median download speeds jumped from 27.22 Mbps in Q3 to 44.25 Mbps in Q4. Similarly median upload speeds increased from 9.7 Mbps in Q3 2024 to 15.9 Mbps in Q4. 

Unwired's Median Download, 75th Percentile Download, and Median Upload Speeds
Q1 2021 through Q2 2025
Unwired's median download, median upload and 75th percentile speeds over time.

WISPs’ performance is improving but competitive threats lurk 

Although the WISPs we studied are improving their networks and delivering better performance for their customers, the broadband market is rapidly changing. In the past many WISPs, particularly those in rural areas, faced little or no competition. But that’s no longer the case. 

As LEO satellite constellations such as Starlink become more powerful and more prevalent (Amazon’s Kuiper now has 153 satellites in orbit and is expected to launch late this year), WISPs will face growing competition from these companies. 

A recent Ookla report on Starlink found that Starlink’s network saw its median download speeds nearly double from 53.95 Mbps in Q3 2022 to 104.71 Mbps in Q1 2025, making its median download speeds on par or better than seven of the eight WISPs we reviewed (Starry was the only exception). With Starlink residential price plans starting around $80 per month, the company’s introductory price plan is a bit more expensive than some introductory price plans from WISPs but Starlink is aggressively promoting its services and offering large discounts on its equipment to entice new customers. 

To continue to play in the broadband space, WISPs need to try to secure more spectrum–licensed or unlicensed— to avoid network congestion and interference and also  invest in network upgrades so their services remain competitive. 

 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.

Network Evolution
Spectrum
Starlink
Etheric
GeoLink
NextLink
Resound Networks
Rise Broadband
Starry
Unwired
Wisper
WISPs

About the author

Sue Marek

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.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| December 14, 2025

Mobile Power Play: Strategic Trade-Offs Shaping 5G Network Performance in Japan

Network Evolution
日本語

Japan’s mobile market is one of the world’s most dynamic and technologically advanced, characterized by intense competition among four major operators: NTT DOCOMO, KDDI (au), SoftBank, and Rakuten Mobile. Each operator employs distinct strategies to secure market share in this highly competitive landscape. This report assesses 5G network performance and availability across Japan’s competitive mobile market.

Key Takeaways

  • 4G remains the essential mobile connectivity service nationwide, while 5G access is geographically segmented. 5G Availability varies dramatically by location, ranging nearly fourfold from a high of 35.2% in Osaka to a low of 9.1% in Yamanashi. Conversely, the 4G network provides a stable and highly reliable foundation, with 4G Availability consistently clustered above the 97% mark across all major operators.
  • Japan’s mobile market is strategically split, with operators prioritizing distinct performance goals. SoftBank and au lead in median download speed across all technologies, at 62.05 Mbps and 57.85 Mbps, respectively. Conversely, Rakuten Mobile achieved the fastest median 5G download speed at 128.39 Mbps. 
  • Operators’ 10th percentile download speeds across prefectures show that highly urbanized prefectures consistently receive higher minimum speeds, reflecting greater site density and capacity investment. NTT DOCOMO maintained the most consistent lower 10th percentile speed across prefectures, peaking at 41 Mbps in Ishikawa. SoftBank’s lower 10th percentile speeds show a significant variation that directly correlates with the urban-rural divide, peaking at 49 Mbps in Aomori but dropping to 4 Mbps in Nagano.

SoftBank leads all technologies in median download speed, while Rakuten Mobile achieves highest 5G speeds

Japan’s mobile telecommunications landscape features highly competitive networks and accelerating technology migration, which is reflected in operator performance data. Speedtest Intelligence®data from Q3 2025 shows SoftBank leading in median download speed across all technologies combined, at 62.05 Mbps, slightly surpassing au’s 57.85 Mbps. SoftBank’s leading performance stems from its notable network modernization and optimization initiatives, which aim to ensure reliable service delivery. Rakuten Mobile and NTT DOCOMO followed with median download speeds of 52.45 Mbps and 50.50 Mbps, respectively.

Mobile Operators All Technologies and 5G Performance, Japan
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

Conversely, Rakuten Mobile led in median 5G performance during the same period. Although its median download speed for all technologies combined was 52.45 Mbps (ranking third), Rakuten’s 5G median download and upload speeds were significantly higher at 128.39 Mbps and 22.34 Mbps, respectively. SoftBank followed with a median download speed of 127.45 Mbps and upload speed of 17.51 Mbps.

Nationwide availability data confirms extensive 4G baseline and differing 5G investment priorities

The Japanese mobile market operates under near-universal adoption, with approximately 194 million cellular connections and a penetration rate of 157% as of early 2025. This saturation dictates that competition is driven primarily by quality of service, speed, and next-generation network availability. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), the national 5G population coverage reached 98.4% by the end of fiscal year 2024.

Analysis of Network Availability using Ookla Speedtest Intelligence data from Q3 2025 measures how frequently mobile users connect to 4G and/or 5G networks. The data demonstrate the robust, widespread coverage of the 4G network across all major carriers, with scores clustered above 97%.

Mobile Operators 4G/5G Network Availability, Japan
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

5G Availability—the percentage of time users with 5G-capable devices spent connected to a 5G network—showed a more varied result. NTT DOCOMO led in 5G Availability with 38.4%, exceeding au by almost 6 percentage points. SoftBank recorded the lowest 5G Availability at 26.5%, despite achieving the fastest median download speed across all technologies. This outcome suggested a strategic trade-off, common across the industry due to Japan’s geographical challenges: operators often prioritize mid-band capacity and speed in accessible, high-traffic urban areas, while relying on their 4G networks for broader national coverage. 

Disparity in 5G footprint across prefectures

Japan’s mobile network strategy is fundamentally shaped by its unique geography and extreme population concentration. While approximately 92.1% of the population resides in urban areas, this density necessitates operators covering vast, geographically challenging territories for the remaining users. The Japanese Government, through the MIC, imposes strict mandates tied to 5G spectrum licensing to ensure equitable service access. These requirements compel operators to invest significantly beyond major urban centers, including mandatory coverage obligations across all 47 prefectures.

Speedtest Intelligence data reveals significant disparities in 5G Availability across Japan’s prefectures. This variation is largely due to the nation’s unique population distribution and the economics associated with network build-out. The 5G Availability percentages vary dramatically, from a high of 35.2% in Osaka to a low of 9.1% in Yamanashi. This disparity means users are nearly four times less likely to access 5G connectivity in the lowest-ranking prefecture (Yamanashi) than in the highest (Osaka).

5G Availability (%) Across Prefectures
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

The prefectures with the highest 5G Availability results correspond to Japan’s most populated and economically vital regions, led by Osaka (35.2%), Tokyo (33.7%), Aichi (30.6%), and Kanagawa (29.1%). Operators have strategically prioritized these high-density areas for 5G deployment to maximize capacity of more advanced technology, and secure high-value customers. Conversely, largely inland or mountainous prefectures with scattered populations, such as Yamanashi (9.1%) and Nagano (9.8%), recorded the lowest 5G Availability. This minimal 5G presence underscores the significant challenge of deploying 5G in regions with low population density and difficult terrain, compelling operators to continue relying on their existing 4G networks.

Median 5G Download Speed (Mbps) Across Prefectures
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

The data shows a regional digital divide, marked by a substantial disparity in 5G Availability between the prefectures with the highest and lowest network access. This inequality is compounded by the fact that users in more rural prefectures not only spend significantly less time connected to the 5G network but also experience lower median 5G download speeds, widening the gap between urban and rural areas.

Osaka for instance, recorded 35.2% 5G Availability and a median 5G download speed of 172 Mbps, while Tokyo achieved 33.7% 5G Availability and 128 Mbps median 5G download speed. The dense site deployment in these centers confirms substantial infrastructure investment, and a more robust spectrum strategy. This strategic metropolitan focus directly supports the recorded higher speeds.

However, several prefectures contradict this correlation. Yamagata, for example, is a clear exception to this trend, recording the nation’s highest speed at 181 Mbps despite low 5G Availability at 13.9%. This suggests a scenario where operators deployed 5G infrastructure to meet regulatory coverage commitments, but low user density prevents network contention.

Operators’ 10th percentile 5G performance underscores the urban-rural quality divide

The analysis of the 10th percentile 5G download speeds across the 47 Japanese prefectures in Q3 2025 provides a crucial measure of minimum quality of performance, representing the speeds experienced by the bottom 10% of all users.

NTT DOCOMO generally recorded higher download speeds at the 10th percentile, securing the highest (peaking at 41 Mbps in Ishikawa) or near-highest scores across the widest array of prefectures. Conversely, SoftBank recorded the single highest minimum 10th percentile download speed across all prefectures, reaching 49 Mbps in Aomori. However, SoftBank’s 10th percentile performance varied significantly, dropping to 4 Mbps in Nagano, and 6 Mbps in Chiba. au and Rakuten Mobile generally showed lower and more tightly grouped minimum speeds, suggesting greater performance vulnerability, typically observed at the cell edge or during times of congestion.

10th Percentile Download (Mbps) Speed by Operator and Prefecture
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

The data shows a clear link between 10th percentile download speeds and urbanization. Highly urbanized prefectures or those serving as regional capitals consistently show higher minimum speeds across all operators. This is likely due to higher site density and focused mid-band spectrum deployment to manage greater user volume. For instance, in Osaka, all operators reported narrower 10th percentile speed ranges, from 18 Mbps to 28 Mbps.

Speedtest data also reveals a positive correlation between the median 5G download speed and the 5G Consistency Score across Japan’s prefectures. Ookla’s 5G Consistency metric measures the network’s ability to consistently provide a high-quality user experience, such as for 4K video streaming. Specifically, it quantifies the proportion of user samples that meet or exceed the performance threshold of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload. Prefectures with higher median download speeds consistently demonstrate a proportionally higher probability of users experiencing a reliable service.

SoftBank recorded the highest 5G Consistency in many prefectures across all regions, demonstrating superior baseline reliability, particularly in Hokkaido and Tōhoku. Notable examples include Aomori in Tōhoku and Nagasaki in Kyūshū, both recording 90.9% consistency, and Iwate (Tōhoku) at 90.7%. NTT DOCOMO and au also demonstrated strong, consistent performance, reflecting the benefits of their mature, optimized infrastructure.

5G Consistency Across Prefectures
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

Significant regional disparities persist, highlighting specific areas that require immediate infrastructure improvement. The highest 5G Consistency scores were concentrated in the Chūgoku and Shikoku regions, with several operators exceeding 80%. Conversely, the lowest consistency scores are primarily found in rural or challenging prefectures, such as the northern Kanto region (Ibaraki, Gunma, Tochigi).

Japan’s 5G rollout has been a success, achieving high national coverage due to proactive regulatory policies and substantial investment from operators. The main policy goal of universal population coverage has clearly been met. However, an analysis of 5G performance shows a measurable disparity between urban and rural areas, likely influenced by strategic operator deployment decisions and geographical challenges. To ensure universal, high-quality digital connectivity across all of Japan’s 47 prefectures by the 2030 target, continued targeted investment in extending 5G infrastructure, coupled with the strategic integration of innovative technologies such as Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN), is critical for bridging the digital divide.

モバイルパワープレイ：日本の5Gネットワークパフォーマンスを形作る戦略的なトレードオフ

日本のモバイル市場は、NTTドコモ、KDDI (au)、ソフトバンク、楽天モバイルという4つの主要な通信事業者の間で激しい競争が繰り広げられる、世界で最もダイナミックで技術的に進んだ市場の1つです。各事業者は、この競争の激しい環境で市場シェアを確保するために、明確な戦略を採用しています。本レポートは、日本の競争的なモバイル市場における5Gネットワークの性能と利用可能性を評価します。

主なポイント

  • 4Gは全国的に不可欠なモバイル接続サービスである一方、5Gアクセスは地理的に分断されています。 5Gの利用可能性は場所によって劇的に異なり、大阪の35.2%を最高に、山梨の9.1%を最低として、約4倍の開きがあります。対照的に、4Gネットワークは、すべての主要な通信事業者で4Gの利用可能性が一貫して97%以上に集約されており、安定した信頼性の高い基盤を提供しています。
  • 日本のモバイル市場は戦略的に二分されており、通信事業者は明確なパフォーマンス目標を優先しています。 SoftBankとauは、全技術のメディアンダウンロード速度でそれぞれ62.05 Mbpsと57.85 Mbpsを記録し、リードしています。一方、楽天モバイルは128.39 Mbpsで最速の5Gメディアンダウンロード速度を達成しました。
  • 都道府県ごとの通信事業者の10パーセンタイルダウンロード速度は、高度に都市化された都道府県が一貫してより高い最低速度を受け取っていることを示しており、 これはより高いサイト密度と容量投資を反映しています。NTTドコモは、石川県で41 Mbpsをピークとする、都道府県全体で最も一貫した低い10パーセンタイル速度を維持しました。SoftBankの低い10パーセンタイル速度は、都市と地方の格差に直接相関する大きな変動を示しており、青森県で49 Mbpsをピークに、長野県では4 Mbpsにまで落ち込んでいます。

SoftBankが全技術のメディアンダウンロード速度でリード、Rakutenが最高の5G速度を達成

日本のモバイル通信環境は、競争の激しいネットワークと加速する技術移行が特徴であり、これは通信事業者のパフォーマンスデータに反映されています。Speedtest Intelligence®の2025年第3四半期のデータによると、SoftBankが全技術を合わせたメディアンダウンロード速度で62.05 Mbpsを記録し、auの57.85 Mbpsをわずかに上回りリードしています。SoftBankの優れたパフォーマンスは、信頼性の高いサービス提供を目指した、注目すべきネットワーク近代化および最適化の取り組みに起因しています。楽天モバイルとNTT DOCOMOは、それぞれ53.54 Mbpsと50.50 Mbpsのメディアンダウンロード速度でそれに続きました。

日本の携帯電話事業者による全技術および5G性能
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

逆に、同期間の5GのメディアンパフォーマンスではRakuten Mobileがリードしました。全技術を合わせたメディアンダウンロード速度は52.45 Mbps（3位）でしたが、Rakutenの5Gメディアンダウンロード速度とアップロード速度はそれぞれ128.39 Mbpsと22.34 Mbpsと著しく高くなっています。SoftBankがこれに続き、メディアンダウンロード速度は127.45 Mbps、アップロード速度は17.51 Mbpsでした。

全国的な可用性データは、広範囲にわたる4Gベースラインと異なる5G投資の優先順位を裏付けています

日本のモバイル市場は、ほぼ普遍的な普及の状況下で運営されており、2025年初頭時点で約1億9400万の携帯電話接続と157%の普及率があります。この飽和状態により、競争は主にサービスの品質、速度、次世代ネットワークの可用性によって推進されています。総務省（MIC）によると、全国の5G人口カバー率は2024年度末までに98.4%に達しました。

2025年第3四半期のOokla Speedtest Intelligenceデータを使用したネットワーク可用性の分析は、モバイルユーザーが4Gまたは5Gネットワークに接続する頻度を測定しています。このデータは、すべての主要なキャリアで4Gネットワークが堅牢かつ広範囲にカバーされており、スコアが97%以上に集約されていることを明確に示しています。

携帯電話事業者による4G/5Gネットワーク可用性、日本
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

5G Availability—5G対応デバイスを持つユーザーが5Gネットワークに接続して過ごした時間の割合—は、より多様な結果を示しました。NTT DOCOMOが38.4%で5G Availabilityをリードし、auをほぼ6パーセントポイント上回りました。SoftBankは、全技術のメディアンダウンロード速度で最速を達成したにもかかわらず、26.5%で最も低い5G Availabilityを記録しました。この結果は、日本の地理的課題により業界全体で一般的な戦略的トレードオフを示唆しています。すなわち、通信事業者は、アクセスしやすくトラフィックの多い都市部でミッドバンドの容量と速度を優先する一方で、より広範な全国カバレッジには4Gネットワークに依存しているということです。

都道府県全体での5Gフットプリントの格差

日本のモバイルネットワーク戦略は、その独自の地理と極端な人口集中によって根本的に形成されています。人口の約92.1%が都市部に居住している一方で、この密度により、通信事業者は残りのユーザーのために広大で地理的に困難な地域をカバーする必要があります。

日本政府は、MICを通じて、公平なサービスアクセスを確保するために5Gスペクトルライセンスに厳格な義務を課しています。これらの要件により、通信事業者は、すべての47都道府県にわたる義務的なカバレッジ義務を含め、主要な都市中心部を超えて大幅な投資を行うことを余儀なくされています。

Speedtest Intelligenceデータは、日本の都道府県全体で5G Availabilityに重大な格差があることを明らかにしています。この変動は、主に国の独自の人口分布と、ネットワーク構築に伴う経済的要因に起因しています。5G Availabilityのパーセンテージは、大阪の35.2%を最高に、山梨の9.1%を最低として、劇的に異なっています。この格差は、ユーザーが最も低いランクの都道府県（山梨）で最も高いランクの都道府県（大阪）と比較して、5G接続にアクセスできる可能性が約4分の1未満であることを意味します。

都道府県別 5G Availability (%)
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

5G Availabilityの結果が最も高い都道府県は、日本の最も人口が多く経済的に重要な地域に対応しており、大阪 (35.2%)、東京 (33.7%)、愛知 (30.6%)、神奈川 (29.1%) がリードしています。通信事業者は、より高度な技術の容量を最大化し、高価値の顧客を確保するために、これらの高密度地域での5G展開を戦略的に優先してきました。対照的に、山梨 (9.1%) や長野 (9.8%) のように、人口が散在している内陸または山岳部の多い都道府県では、最低の5G Availabilityが記録されました。この最小限の5Gの存在は、人口密度の低い地域や困難な地形での5G展開の重大な課題を浮き彫りにしており、通信事業者は既存の4Gネットワークに頼り続けることを余儀なくされています。

都道府県別 5G中央値ダウンロード速度（Mbps)
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

データは、最高のネットワークアクセスを持つ都道府県と最低のネットワークアクセスを持つ都道府県との間で、5G Availabilityに大きな格差がある地域的なデジタルデバイドを示しています。この不平等は、より地方の都道府県のユーザーが5Gネットワークに接続して過ごす時間が著しく少ないだけでなく、メディアン5Gダウンロード速度も低く、都市部と地方の格差を広げているという事実によってさらに悪化しています。

例えば、大阪では5G Availabilityが35.2%、メディアン5Gダウンロード速度が172 Mbpsを記録しましたが、東京では5G Availabilityが33.7%、メディアン5Gダウンロード速度が128 Mbpsでした。これらの中心地での高密度なサイト展開は、大規模なインフラ投資と、より堅牢なスペクトル戦略を裏付けています。この戦略的な大都市圏への集中は、記録されたより高い速度を直接的に支えています。

しかし、いくつかの都道府県はこの相関関係に反しています。例えば、山形県は、5G Availabilityが13.9%と低いにもかかわらず、国内最高の速度である181 Mbpsを記録しており、この傾向の明確な例外です。これは、通信事業者が規制上のカバレッジ義務を満たすために5Gインフラを展開したものの、ユーザー密度の低さがネットワークの競合を防いでいるシナリオを示唆しています。

通信事業者の10パーセンタイル5Gパフォーマンスが、都市と地方の品質格差を浮き彫りに

2025年第3四半期における日本の47都道府県全体での10パーセンタイル5Gダウンロード速度の分析は、最低限のパフォーマンス品質の重要な指標を提供し、全ユーザーの下位10%が経験する速度を表しています。

NTT DOCOMOは、一般的に10パーセンタイルでより高いダウンロード速度を記録し、最も広範な都道府県で最高（石川県で41 Mbpsをピーク）またはそれに近いスコアを確保しました。対照的に、SoftBankは、全都道府県の中で単一で最高の最低10パーセンタイルダウンロード速度を記録し、青森県で49 Mbpsに達しました。しかし、SoftBankの10パーセンタイルパフォーマンスは大きく変動し、長野県で4 Mbps、千葉県で6 Mbpsにまで落ち込みました。auとRakuten Mobileは、一般的に低く、より密接にグループ化された最低速度を示しており、通常、セルエッジや混雑時に見られる、より大きなパフォーマンスの脆弱性を示唆しています。

事業者および都道府県別10パーセンタイルダウンロード速度（Mbps）
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

データは、10パーセンタイルダウンロード速度と都市化の間に明確な関連性があることを示しています。高度に都市化された都道府県、または地方の中心都市として機能する都道府県は、すべての通信事業者で一貫してより高い最低速度を示しています。これは、より高いサイト密度と、より大きなユーザーボリュームを管理するための集中的なミッドバンドスペクトル展開による可能性が高いです。例えば、大阪では、すべての通信事業者が10パーセンタイル速度でより狭い範囲を報告しており、それは18 Mbpsから28 Mbpsの間に及んでいます。

Speedtest dataはまた、日本の都道府県全体で、メディアン5Gダウンロード速度と5G Consistency Scoreの間に正の相関関係があることを示しています。Ooklaの5G Consistency metricは、4Kビデオストリーミングなどの高品質なユーザーエクスペリエンスを一貫して提供するネットワークの能力を測定します。具体的には、25 Mbpsのダウンロード速度と3 Mbpsのアップロード速度の性能閾値を満たす、または超えるユーザーサンプルの割合を定量化します。メディアンダウンロード速度が高い都道府県は、ユーザーが信頼性の高いサービスを経験する可能性が比例して高いことを一貫して示しています。

SoftBankは、すべての地域で多くの都道府県で最高の5G Consistencyを記録し、特に北海道と東北地方で優れたベースラインの信頼性を示しています。注目すべき例としては、東北の青森県と九州の長崎県があり、どちらも90.9%のconsistencyを記録し、岩手県（東北）は90.7%でした。NTT DOCOMOとauもまた、成熟した最適化されたインフラストラクチャの利点を反映して、強力で一貫したパフォーマンスを示しました。

都道府県別 5G Consistency
Source: Speedtest Intelligence® | Q3 2025

地域間の大きな格差が依然として残っており、早急なインフラ改善が必要な特定の地域を浮き彫りにしています。最高の5G Consistency scoresは中国・四国地方に集中しており、複数の通信事業者が80%を超えています。逆に、最低のconsistency scoresは、主に北関東地方（茨城、群馬、栃木）のような地方や困難な環境の都道府県で見られます。

日本の5G展開は成功しており、積極的な規制政策と通信事業者からの多大な投資により、高い全国カバレッジを達成しました。ユニバーサルな人口カバレッジという主要な政策目標は明確に達成されています。しかし、5Gパフォーマンスの分析は、戦略的な通信事業者の展開決定と地理的な課題の影響を受けている可能性が高い、都市部と地方との間に測定可能な格差があることを示しています。2030年という目標までに、日本の47すべての都道府県でユニバーサルで高品質なデジタル接続を確保するためには、5Gインフラの拡張への継続的かつ的を絞った投資と、Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) のような革新的な技術の戦略的な統合が、デジタルデバイドを埋めるために不可欠です。

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.

Network Evolution

About the author

Affandy Johan

Affandy Johan is the Industry Analyst at Ookla Research. He utilizes Ookla's data to develop insightful analyses covering various factors and aspects impacting the market. Affandy has extensive experience in the telecom industry, having worked for major vendors and operators in the Asia Pacific region.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| March 25, 2025

Charting Malaysia’s 5G Journey: From Urban Priorities to Nationwide Coverage

Network Evolution

Malaysia has made strong progress in improving mobile internet connectivity nationwide in recent years. Key government initiatives, particularly the National Digital Network Plan (JENDELA), combined with investments by telecommunications operators, have driven this growth. However, challenges remain in rural areas, where coverage is still inconsistent.

Key Takeaways

  • Malaysia’s mobile download speed increased 2.3 times as 5G adoption surged. Malaysia’s mobile performance improved significantly between Q1 2023 and Q4 2024, with median download speeds increasing 2.3 times from 45.57 Mbps to 105.36 Mbps. Upload speeds also rose from 12.84 Mbps to 19.62 Mbps. 5G adoption played a key role, growing from 6.7% of connections in Q1 2023 to 41.9% by Q4 2024.
  • From early to mid-2023, 5G Availability in Malaysia expanded from major urban states to more rural areas. Between Q1 2023 and Q4 2024, rural states saw noticeable increases in 5G Availability — the proportion of users of 5G-capable devices who spend most of their time on 5G networks — driven by network expansion beyond urban centers. Labuan Federal Territory recorded the largest increase, with a 34.3 percentage point rise.
  • Rural states reported faster 5G speeds than urban ones, due to lower congestion and network demand. In Q4 2024, states with lower 5G Availability, such as Kelantan, Terengganu, and Pahang, recorded median 5G download speeds exceeding 366 Mbps. Meanwhile, urbanized states like Selangor and Kuala Lumpur, with higher 5G Availability, reported slower speeds below 280 Mbps, highlighting the increasing strain on urban networks as 5G adoption accelerates.

Improving Nationwide Connectivity in Malaysia

The efforts of the Malaysian regulator, Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), and major telecommunications operators have been pivotal in narrowing the digital divide and improving internet connectivity nationwide. Central to these efforts is the Jalinan Digital Negara (JENDELA) program, which aims to expand 4G coverage, increase mobile broadband speeds, and prepare the country for 5G rollout. Phase 1, completed in 2022, focused on strengthening 4G networks and shutting down 3G services. By the end of this phase, 4G coverage had reached 96.9% of populated areas, with average mobile broadband speeds of 116.03 Mbps. Phase 2, which runs from 2022 to 2025, builds on this progress with targets of mean mobile broadband speeds of 100 Mbps and achieving 100% 4G and 80% 5G population coverage.

Malaysia’s 5G rollout has been a central part of its connectivity strategy, with Digital Nasional Berhad (DNB) leading the deployment of 5G infrastructure as the single wholesale network provider. The rollout aims to provide widespread 5G coverage by 2025, unlocking opportunities for advancements in smart cities, healthcare, and logistics.  In May 2023, the Malaysian government announced plans to introduce a second 5G network provider, contingent on DNB reaching 80% population coverage. DNB met this milestone in December 2023, recording 80.2% coverage. This achievement paved the path for the government to award the second 5G network license to U Mobile. According to MCMC, introducing a second provider is expected to drive competition, enhance network resilience, and help lower costs for consumers in the long term.

Steady 5G adoption pushes Malaysia’s mobile download speeds past 100 Mbps

Speedtest Intelligence® data reveals that Malaysia has experienced a steady increase in both mobile median download and upload speeds for all technologies. Our data reveals that median mobile download speeds for all technologies combined in Malaysia increased 2.3 times from 45.57 Mbps up to 105.36 Mbps between Q1 2023 and Q4 2024. There was a slight improvement across upload speeds, with the median mobile upload speed in the market  increasing in the same period from 12.84 Mbps to 19.62 Mbps.

Mobile (All Technologies Combined) Performance, Malaysia
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q1 2023 – Q4 2024

The continuous expansion of the 5G network by the nation’s 5G single wholesale network (SWN) provider, DNB, and increased 5G adoption has helped with the upward increase of mobile speed in the past two years. Data from GSMA Intelligence shows a steady and consistent increase in the percentage of 5G connections in Malaysia from Q1 2023 to Q4 2024. 5G connections grew from 6.7% in Q1 2023 to 21.7% by Q4 2023, and further to 41.9% by Q4 2024.

Percentage of Mobile Connections on 5G in Malaysia
GSMA Intelligence | Q1 2023 – Q4 2024

This sustained growth reflects expanding 5G coverage, the increasing availability of 5G devices, and growing consumer and enterprise demand for faster, more reliable mobile connectivity. The rollout by DNB and efforts by mobile operators to make 5G plans more accessible have contributed to this adoption. The data suggests that 5G has transitioned from early adoption stages to becoming a mainstream technology, with continued growth expected as 5G coverage expands nationwide.

5G Deployment Focus Shifts Toward Broader State-Level Coverage

By the end of 2022, DNB had achieved 50% 5G coverage of populated areas. Following this milestone, the government accelerated its target, mandating DNB to reach 80% coverage by the end of 2023 — a goal that was originally set for the end of 2024. Ookla’s 5G Availability data from Speedtest Intelligence represents the proportion of users of 5G-capable devices who spend most of their time on 5G networks. Between Q1 2023 and Q4 2024, Malaysia’s 5G Availability increased from 20.9% to 32.8%.

Analysis of the data from Q1 2023 to Q4 2024 reveals clear shifts in 5G deployment patterns across Malaysia. In early 2023, major cities and urban centers such as Putrajaya (35.4%), the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur (29.3%), and Johor (18%) reported the highest levels of 5G Availability. This early focus on urban areas was expected, as these densely populated locations provided faster returns on investment and met immediate demand from businesses and consumers.

5G Availability (%) Trend by State, Malaysia
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q1 2023 – Q4 2024

By mid-2023, deployment efforts began shifting toward smaller and more rural states. This shift is reflected in the substantial increases in 5G Availability in areas such as Labuan Federal Territory (+34.4 percentage points), Penang (+20.8), Kedah (+19.1), and Terengganu (+18.4). These gains align with the objectives of JENDELA Phase 2, which aims to extend 5G connectivity nationwide. The strong growth in these regions demonstrates the government’s and operators’ commitment to bridging the digital divide and ensuring more balanced connectivity between urban centers and rural communities.

Percentage Point Growth in 5G Availability Across Malaysian States
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q1 2023 – Q4 2024

Urbanized states and territories continued to see steady growth in 5G Availability, though at a slower rate compared to more rural states. For example, Putrajaya and Kuala Lumpur reported smaller increases of 16.1 and 10.4 percentage points, respectively, showing that these areas were already well covered and improvements were focused on coverage quality and capacity enhancements rather than new deployments. This deployment strategy reflects a balanced national approach — solidifying urban 5G readiness while expanding access into smaller cities and rural regions to meet nationwide targets.

Rural states show lower 5G Availability but experience faster 5G speeds

Data for Q4 2024 highlights significant differences in 5G performance across Malaysian states. Rural states such as Kelantan, Terengganu, and Pahang report the highest median 5G download speeds, with Kelantan leading at 392.04 Mbps, followed by Terengganu at 375.38 Mbps and Pahang at 366.03 Mbps. However, these states also have lower 5G Availability, with Kelantan at 18.2%, Pahang at 17.3%, and Terengganu at 23.4%. In contrast, more developed areas such as Putrajaya and the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, despite having higher 5G Availability rates of 51.5% and 39.7%, show lower median download speeds of 325.47 Mbps and 243.21 Mbps, respectively.

5G Availability (%) and Median 5G Download Speed (Mbps) By State, Malaysia
Speedtest Intelligence® | Q4 2024

This is somewhat expected, as the higher 5G speeds in rural states can be attributed to lower user density and less network congestion. With fewer users accessing the network simultaneously, available bandwidth is distributed among a smaller number of connections, resulting in faster speeds. Additionally, the rollout of 5G infrastructure in these states is often targeted at the state’s capital city and  major towns. However, the limited availability indicates that coverage is still expanding and does not yet reach the broader population. In contrast, urban areas such as Kuala Lumpur, Penang, and Selangor, which have higher 5G Availability, experience lower median speeds due to higher user demand and potential network congestion. As 5G adoption continues to grow and more users connect to the network, performance fluctuations are expected due to increasing traffic demand.

Malaysia’s 5G landscape faces new dynamics with the introduction of a second 5G provider

In November 2024, Malaysia’s government announced a shift to a 5G dual-network wholesale model, and granted a second 5G wholesale network license to U Mobile, the country’s third-largest mobile network operator. The government’s decision to introduce a second 5G network reflects a strategic effort to increase competition, improve service delivery, and accelerate the nationwide rollout of 5G. U Mobile has committed to deploying this network independently, with a target completion by mid-2026, positioning itself as a major player in Malaysia’s next-generation connectivity landscape.

The shift to a dual-network model is expected to bring several advantages to the market. Increased competition between two wholesale providers should lead to better network quality and more competitive pricing for mobile network operators and end consumers. This dual-network setup strengthens resilience in the national network infrastructure by reducing reliance on a single provider. Furthermore, having two competing 5G networks could drive innovation and encourage more aggressive investment in new technologies and service enhancements that will benefit sectors like healthcare, smart cities, and logistics, all of which are part of Malaysia’s digital transformation agenda. 

However, this development does not come without challenges. Deploying a second nationwide 5G network requires significant investment in infrastructure, spectrum management, and network operations. There is a risk of resource duplication and inefficiencies if the two operators do not coordinate their efforts, especially in areas where coverage overlaps. Additionally, dual wholesale network could become an issue, potentially slowing the unified growth of the 5G ecosystem. Interoperability between the two networks, as well as integration with existing 4G infrastructure, will also require careful management to ensure seamless service quality for consumers and businesses alike.

We will continue to monitor Malaysia’s telecom market as it evolves. For more information about Speedtest Intelligence data and insights, please contact us.

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

Network Evolution

About the author

Affandy Johan

Affandy Johan is the Industry Analyst at Ookla Research. He utilizes Ookla's data to develop insightful analyses covering various factors and aspects impacting the market. Affandy has extensive experience in the telecom industry, having worked for major vendors and operators in the Asia Pacific region.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| April 26, 2022

The Case for Private Networks in India

Network Evolution

The recent recommendation from the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) around providing an enabling framework for enterprises to build their own private networks is in line with other 5G markets, where governments are looking to drive the digitization of key industries. However, Indian operators see this as limiting their return on investment in the 5G spectrum. Looking at the example of private networks across Europe, and Germany in particular, we believe that Indian telcos shouldn’t see TRAI’s proposal as a threat. Rather, they should use the buzz around the spectrum for verticals as a way to get enterprises interested in digitalization.

The overall financial health of the Indian telecom industry remains fragile. Furthermore, operators’ ability to invest in upgrading their network is negatively impacted by low average revenue per user (ARPU) levels and high regulatory costs. As a result, India’s mobile performance is affected. According to the Speedtest Global Index™, in March 2022 India ranked 120 (out of 142 countries) with a 13.67 Mbps median mobile download speed vs. the global average of 29.96 Mbps. The 5G network rollout will require intensive capital  investment and allowing enterprises to have access to dedicated spectrum can potentially limit operators’ 5G-addressable revenue.

The case for 5G in manufacturing

On the consumer side, 5G will boost Indian mobile performance, as we have postulated in our recent article, new 5G launches in Asia Pacific point to a potential 10x increase in median download speeds (5G vs 4G-LTE). However, 5G will also deliver socioeconomic benefits in India, on account of a number of 5G use cases that could enable new applications across all sectors. According to GSMA Intelligence, 5G is expected to contribute around $455 billion to the Indian economy over the next 20 years, accounting for more than 0.6% of GDP by 2040. One of the sectors that stands to benefit from 5G is the manufacturing sector, representing 20% of the total benefit. Retail, ICT and agricultural sectors should also benefit.

The Indian government has already zeroed in on making India’s manufacturing sector more competitive on a global scene. As such, the “Make in India” goal is to make India self-reliant and also to increase the share of the manufacturing sector to 25% of GDP “in the coming years.”

As of now, this is a distant goal. China is still the world’s manufacturing superpower, accounting for 29% of global manufacturing output in 2020, followed by Japan (17%) and Germany (5%). All of these countries have embarked on digitization strategies.

In addition, manufacturing companies look to optimize and control production processes, improve safety, and reduce costs in order to maximize the return on investment. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing challenges and pain points for manufacturers, highlighting the need to improve supply-chain resilience and boost production speed and flexibility. However, even before the pandemic, the manufacturing sector was undergoing digital transformation – the so-called fourth industrial revolution or Industry 4.0, referring to the use of technologies such as machine learning, edge computing, IoT, digital twins, and new networks to aid automation and enable data exchange.

According to Ericsson, typical revenue increases when manufacturers digitize their processes come from increased throughput and quality (2–3%), while typical cost savings originate from improved capital efficiency (5–10%) and decreased manufacturing costs (4–8%). A proportion of manufacturers will need dedicated network resources to meet their transformation goals and ensure data isolation and security. According to the GSMA Intelligence Enterprise in Focus 2020 survey, 22% of manufacturers require location-specific coverage (e.g. factory, campus).

Historically, Wi-Fi has been the connectivity choice for private networks. However, mobile technologies such as 4G/LTE and 5G are better suited to Operational Technologies’ network requirements of high volume, high reliability, mobility, and always-on operations. 5G and 5G Standalone in particular offers the most benefits related to eMBB, massive IoT, and critical IoT. Additionally, enterprises decided to deploy proprietary networks to have more control over their networks; the increased security offered by isolating their data from public networks is an attractive benefit.

Private networks aren’t new 

A number of countries are looking to private networks to address Industry 4.0 objectives and awarding spectrum for vertical use e.g. Germany, Japan and France. According to GSA data, as of February 2022 there were 656 organizations deploying LTE or 5G private mobile networks. GSA’s data points to the manufacturing sector as a strong adopter of private mobile networks, with 111 identified companies involved in known pilots or deployments, which is up from 51 at the start of 2021.

Dedicated spectrum available for private mobile networks has already been allocated in France, the United States, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Germany is considered to be a poster child for Industry 4.0. Afterall, the term “Industry 4.0” was coined at Hannover Messe over a decade ago. It is therefore only natural to look to Germany and its approach to private networks. In Germany, the national regulatory authority (BnetzA) is promoting industrial policy and reserved 100 MHz in the 3,700-3,800 MHz for local networks, noting that the spectrum can be used in particular for Industry 4.0. “By awarding spectrum for local 5G networks, we are creating scope for innovation for enterprises,” stated Jochen Homann, Bundesnetzagentur President. As of April 15, 2022, the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) received a total of 208 applications for the allocation of frequencies for local 5G networks and granted the same amount.

We have commented on how the private networks landscape is developing in Europe here. Simply assigning spectrum to verticals isn’t enough to drive market adoption. In an upcoming analysis, we will discuss how the French government has prioritized 5G as an avenue to drive digital transformation of the economy via a number of funds. According to the GSA, there were a total of 66 private networks all together in France, Germany, and Japan, despite enterprises being able to acquire spectrum since 2019.

Despite the 208 applications that BNetzA received, the GSA has counted 45 private networks in Germany, with a majority distributed between three verticals: manufacturing (14), power and water utilities (11), and devices testing and lab as a service (seven).

It is important to note that globally, as per the latest GSA data, only 21% of networks were 5G only, and mostly composed of test networks. Until the 5G device ecosystem matures, the majority of private networks will remain 4G/LTE, though using equipment that is 5G ready. Only after the availability of industrial-feature-rich 5G release 16 chipsets, which will happen in the next few years, will the 5G deployments move beyond trials and proof of concept into full scale deployments. Germany is an outlier here: 5G and 5G SA are making headways in Germany. Audi, KUKA, Volkswagen, and Siemens take an active role in testing and deploying 5G SA private networks utilizing localized spectrum in the 3500 MHz band (n78).

The many routes to market

TRAI has proposed an enabling framework for enterprises to build their own private networks via a range of deployment scenarios, including spectrum leasing and dedicated spectrum. The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) representing major telecom companies such as Bharti Airtel Ltd, Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, and Vodafone Idea Ltd. opposed this, stating that TRAI should: “Disallow private enterprise networks for the financial viability and orderly growth of the telecom industry, which is more than capable of delivering  these services to businesses”.

Yes and no. Operators can utilize various deployment models, from public dedicated networks through hybrid networks (network slicing, public/private campus, private RAN with public core) to private networks. Within these various models, network slicing and edge computing add the benefits of QoS, privacy, security, and specific SLAs.

When it comes to private networks, the typical rules of engagement no longer apply, and with network virtualization continuing, the ecosystem of vendors has expanded beyond traditional telco players. Just recently Cisco entered this crowded market that already consists of operators, hyperscalers, startups, and equipment vendors. Amazon’s introduction of AWS Private 5G network is a good example of the growing “coopetition” trend. In some cases, AWS would work with operators to provide 5G core and edge computing capabilities, while in some others, it could compete to offer end-to-end solutions. Nokia is looking to address the enterprise demand in India via working with network operators, but also by working directly with enterprises, as Ricky Corker, Chief Customer Experience Officer, Nokia recently stated.

We can draw lessons by looking at the approach that European operators took when addressing the enterprise opportunity. Deutsche Telekom has been offering campus network solutions for enterprises since 2019, and now operates more than ten such local networks based on 5G non-standalone technology or LTE across Germany. In January 2022, the operator expanded its offering to include location-specific 5G mobile networks for companies based on 5G Standalone Technology (5G SA), powered by the Ericsson Private 5G portfolio. The operator can also position itself as a systems integrator (SI) for 5G private networks for Industry 4.0 by utilizing T-Systems’ credentials and its deal with AWS.

Similarly, Vodafone takes an active role in deploying private networks, and distinguishes three degrees of industrial control depending on a private network setup.

In the first scenario, a dedicated mobile private network (MPN) brings total control to the enterprise because everything stays on site. There is no interoperability with public networks. This is particularly well suited for mission- or business-critical applications that don’t need to interface with the public internet.

The second option is a hybrid private network, which is a blend of public and private infrastructure. It enables interoperability with public networks for those devices and users which move outside the private network, while at the same time giving the end user a choice regarding where the data is stored.

The third option, a virtual private network, uses a dedicated slice of a public 5G network. End-user control over the setup is reduced, but compared to the public network it has a dedicated network resource, and allows for greater data isolation, security and privacy, and further SLA customization (availability and reliability). According to Marc Sauter, head of mobile private networks for Vodafone’s business division, network slicing hinges on future releases of the 5G standard, available from next year. “That is when virtual private networks will be more relevant, and a new market will open up with smaller customers.” Vodafone is also very vocal about the importance of the ecosystem, and working on innovation. In its innovation hub in Milan, Vodafone works with developers and startups, and large companies can play around with 5G use cases.

Leveraging existing credentials and forming partnerships to go beyond core competencies can open up new markets for operators. Partners’ ecosystem is key, and to be successful,  operators need to partner across the ecosystem. As enterprises’ needs vary, having a broad portfolio of vendors that can address various verticals, technological, and coverage needs will only stimulate the growth of the market.

Indian telcos have already embarked on this journey. Airtel has partnered with Tech Mahindra for a joint 5G innovation lab to develop “Make in India” use cases for the local and global markets, including customized enterprise-grade private networks. These services will combine Airtel’s integrated connectivity portfolio of 5G ready mobile network, fiber, SDWAN, and IoT along with Tech Mahindra’s SI capabilities.Meanwhile, Vodafone Idea (Vi) joined forces with A5G Networks to enable industry 4.0 and smart mobile edge computing in India. They have jointly set up a pilot private network in Mumbai using existing 4G spectrum.

Rather than seeing spectrum for verticals as a threat, operators can use it as a way to get enterprises, in particular manufacturing companies, interested in digitalization. According to the FICCI-EFESO survey, 36% of organizations will implement “Use of Industry 4.0 technologies for predicting failures in machines, products and processes” in the next 1-2 years, while 22% have already done so. The opportunity is there for the taking.

To learn more about how Ookla® has worked with operators and industries to help plan for 5G growth, contact us.

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

Network Evolution

About the author

Sylwia Kechiche

Sylwia Kechiche, formerly Principal Industry Analyst, Enterprise at Ookla. Previously Principal Analyst, IoT and Enterprise at GSMA Intelligence, where she was responsible for the development of IoT & Enterprise product, including market sizing, custom consulting, survey work and report writing.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| February 19, 2024

Illustrating the Global Reach of 5G (Poster Download)

5G

Ookla® Speedtest Intelligence® data illustrates the continued expansion of 5G networks globally, with Speedtest users in India in particular adding many new locations during the course of 2023. Our recent analysis of global 5G performance showed that newer 5G markets such as India, Malaysia, and Brazil have all contributed to an uplift in worldwide median performance. While the number of locations with 5G continues to rise, 5G download speeds show no sign of levelling off, increasing by 17% in 2023 to reach 207.42 Mbps. However, 5G upload performance has stagnated, up only 1% year-on-year to 19.90 Mbps, and latency continues to drag on the 5G experience, with no statistical difference year-on-year, with the median user globally experiencing a 5G connection latency of 44 ms.

To fully appreciate the continued expansion of 5G networks around the world, we’ve created a high-resolution downloadable poster (mobile friendly version available here), detailing locations with 5G based on consumer initiated Speedtest samples.

Ookla will be at Mobile World Congress this year, located at in Booth 2I28 in Hall 2. Please drop by to discuss the state of connectivity in your market, and how Ookla’s network insights can help deliver better connected experiences.

Preview image of Ookla The State of 5G Poster. Click here to download.

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.

5G
Network Evolution

About the author

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.

More Articles

Ookla Research™ Articles
| May 5, 2021

Starlink: Bridging the Digital Divide or Shooting for the Stars?

Satellite

Elon Musk has a vision to use Starlink satellites to deliver world-class internet speeds to the rural households that have been left behind by so many infrastructure projects over the years. It’s a noble goal, and one that’s become increasingly necessary given our reliance on the internet over the past year. It could also help bridge the glaring gaps in performance between cities and rural communities which the Biden administration is prioritizing in the American Jobs Plan. Starlink is still in beta phase, but we decided to use data from Speedtest Intelligence® to investigate Q1 2021 performance in the U.S. and Canada to see if the program is living up to expectations.

Starlink speeds are sometimes a vast improvement, sometimes not

ookla_united_states_median_download_starlink_map_0521-3
In the U.S. during Q1 2021, median download speeds from Starlink ranged from 40.36 Mbps in Columbia County, Oregon to 93.09 Mbps in Shasta County, California. These represented everything from a dramatic improvement over other fixed broadband providers (545.6% faster in Tehama County, California) to a disappointment (67.9% slower in Clay County, Missouri).

ookla_united_states_download_comparison_starlink_map_0521-3

Starlink shows a narrower range of performance in Canada

ookla_canada_median_download_starlink_map_0521-3

Starlink’s Q1 2021 median download speeds in Canadian provinces showed a smaller range than in the U.S. with a low of 53.61 Mbps in Ontario and a high of 80.57 Mbps in Saskatchewan. Percentage difference when compared to all other fixed broadband providers also showed a narrower range. In Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Starlink customers reported median download speeds 59.6% and 38.5% faster than those for all other fixed broadband providers combined. In Québec, median download speeds were nearly equal, with Starlink performing only 3.4% slower. In B.C., Alberta, Ontario and New Brunswick, on the other hand, Starlink’s median download speeds were 20.9%, 24.2%, 29.5% and 40.7% slower than other fixed broadband providers, respectively.

ookla_canada_download_comparison_starlink_map_0521-3

Starlink latency is up to 486% higher in U.S., 369% in Canada

A reasonable latency is critical to effective internet use. If your latency is too high, you might be the one on the video call with the tinny voice who’s answering questions when the conversation’s already moved on. If you’re a gamer, you already know that latency can cause your characters to stutter-step around at critical moments. Starlink plans to use low-Earth orbit satellites with laser links to radically decrease latency in rural areas. What we’re seeing so far, though, is that Starlink’s latency is higher than the alternatives, often much higher.

ookla_united_states_latency_comparison_starlink_map_0521-3

Starlink’s latency was higher in all but one of the U.S. counties surveyed during Q1 2021. The exception was Mariposa County, California where Starlink’s latency was 17.4% lower than that of all other providers combined. Median latency values on Starlink were observed from 31 ms (Kittitas County, Washington) all the way up to 88 ms (Otsego County, Michigan). For comparison, median latency values for all other providers combined ranged from 8 ms (Fairfax County, Virginia) to 47 ms (Daviess County, Kentucky).

ookla_canada_latency_comparison_starlink_map_0521-3

In Canada, Starlink’s latency was higher in all provinces surveyed during Q1 2021. With median latency values from 34 ms (B.C.) to 61 ms (Saskatchewan), Starlink’s latency was 209.1% to 369.2% higher than that of all other providers combined.

Starlink meets minimum tier for FCC’s Rural Development Opportunity Fund

In order to compete for the FCC’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF), providers must meet the minimum performance tier (25 Mbps download / 3 Mbps upload / 100 ms latency). We analyzed Speedtest® results for users with more than two tests during Q1 2021 to see whether Starlink could potentially qualify for this funding.

ookla_percentage_users_fcc_performance_tiers_0521

In both the U.S. and Canada, Starlink provided competitive or better service at the minimum (25/3/100) tier. In the U.S., 86.7% of Starlink users met this threshold, compared with 83.2% of those on all other fixed broadband providers. Although the FCC’s criteria don’t apply north of the border, 85.6% of Canadian Starlink users met the Minimum threshold, compared with 77.8% for all other providers. Starlink showed a smaller proportion of users meeting the baseline and above baseline tiers than all other providers combined.

Given this data, it’s safe to say Starlink could be a cost-effective solution that dramatically improves rural broadband access without having to lay thousands of miles of fiber.

Musk’s Starlink experiment is certainly fascinating and we applaud any effort to get better service for rural residents. That said, it’s clearly early days for the rapidly growing Starlink, and results from Q1 may not be indicative of future performance. We’ll be watching to see how performance improves as more satellites are launched and as more users join the service. If you’re on Starlink, take a Speedtest to share how your connection is performing.

Editor’s note: this article was updated on May 17 with a sentence clarifying how this data should be interpreted.

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.

Satellite
Network Evolution

About the author

Isla McKetta

Isla was the first content manager at Ookla, working her way up to Sr. Director of Consumer Marketing in her 8+ years with the company.

More Articles