Karim Yaici | May 18, 2026

Fast fiber, slow Wi-Fi: the router bottleneck in the Gulf region

Ookla’s Speedtest® data indicates that a router’s suboptimal placement can negatively impact in-home Wi-Fi.

The Gulf region has one of the highest levels of fiber penetration in the world. However, the persistent bottleneck for internet performance often lies within the home itself and specifically, the quality and placement of Customer Premises Equipment (CPE). Addressing this bottleneck can unlock the full potential of fiber and deliver the promise of gigabit fiber to a wider base of subscribers. We use Ookla’s Speedtest data to investigate the impact of CPE placement on home Wi-Fi performance using data from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E., assess how different Wi-Fi standards influence this relationship, and provide practical solutions to mitigate the in-home performance gap.

Key Takeaways:

Distance from the router and obstacles like walls can make Wi-Fi performance drop significantly. As a user’s device moves away from the Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) or is separated by walls, a device’s Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) (measured in dBm) declines, deteriorating median download speed. Ookla’s Speedtest data shows that this relationship is not linear: it sets a ceiling where speed starts to level off, and conversely, a point beyond which performance degradation accelerates.
Every new Wi-Fi standard introduced innovations that pushed both the maximum throughput ceiling and the RSSI breaking point further. Speed improvements for Wi-Fi 4, 5, and 6 generally plateau beyond –40 dBm. On the other hand, performance deteriorates rapidly below –60 dBm. Newer standards, namely Wi-Fi 6 and 7, extend the usable RSSI range before hitting the performance cliff.
While Wi-Fi 7 is more data-efficient than its predecessors, its “breaking point” in the U.A.E. is reached at a shorter distance (i.e., stronger signal) than in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Users in the U.A.E., known for its high urban density and the use of low-emissive (low-E) glass to reflect light and heat, experience accelerated degradation at around –55 dBm, which is likely due to co-channel interference and signal degradation. This shows that local environmental factors can influence RSSI breaking points.
The choice of spectrum bands dictates the balance between high throughput and signal resilience against physical barriers. The 5 GHz band allows higher speeds but suffers from a sharp decline in performance, with speed deterioration accelerating below –60 dBm, resulting in a loss of 30% to 44% in speed over a 10 dB drop. Conversely, the 6 GHz band’s lack of congestion allows it to maintain very high speeds (often above 100 Mbps at –80 dBm), effectively compensating for its higher susceptibility to signal absorption.

In-home Wi-Fi throughput is directly correlated with signal strength

We previously identified that the indoor Wi-Fi network could be a bottleneck to delivering fiber’s high throughput. In Gulf countries, including Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the U.A.E., we saw download and upload speeds improve as ISPs introduced multi-gigabit plans and raised entry-level packages’ speed. The growing adoption of new CPEs that support Wi-Fi 6/7 standards is helping significantly boost the in-home broadband speed, but legacy Wi-Fi (Wi-Fi 4 and 5) remains a limitation for some users. The choice of a spectrum band (2.4 GHz vs. 5 GHz) also balances capacity and reach.

Beyond the CPE’s Wi-Fi standard and spectrum band, its physical placement and the inherent limitations of indoor propagation through obstacles, due to increased use of insulating materials and low-emissivity glass, impact the connected experience indoors. We use Ookla’s Speedtest data to assess the relationship between measured Wi-Fi download speed and RSSI (the power of the signal received by the end-user device). This metric serves as a proxy for the factors that could affect the relationship between the router and the user’s device.

We also look at how this relation shifts depending on the Wi-Fi generation (4, 5, 6, and 7) and the spectrum band used (2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz). We identified fixed broadband CPEs where connected devices conducted multiple tests with different RSSI levels (between October 2025 and February 2026), and collected the corresponding median download speed readings.

RSSI measurements use a logarithmic scale where values closer to zero indicate a stronger signal. RSSI typically ranges from –10 dBm in direct proximity of the CPE to –90 dBm at the edge of the network. For the signal from the router to be accurately interpreted, it must arrive with enough power to be distinguishable from the background noise floor, defined as Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) (this analysis focuses solely on RSSI).

The chart below shows a clear and consistent speed deterioration as RSSI values decline. In Saudi Arabia, a device receiving a signal of –30 dBm, indicating clear line-of-sight of the router, achieves a median download speed much higher than when the signal weakens to a range of –60 to –70 dBm, which can be caused by distance or a separating wall. Above –60 dBm, performance trends start to diverge considerably, reflecting differences in terms of fiber penetration levels, proportion of households with 500+ Mbps packages, and the share of CPEs with modern standards. The result is that users in Qatar and the U.A.E. achieve much higher download speeds than those in Saudi Arabia.

Wi-Fi Median Download Speed vs. RSSI, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Dynamic Rate Shifting (DRS) explains this rapid decline in download speed. Wi-Fi devices automatically negotiate their Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) based on the link quality. When the RSSI is high (and the SNR is healthy), the system uses complex modulation, which packs more bits into radio signals, but they are extremely sensitive to interference and noise. At higher distances, the Wi-Fi system ‘downshifts’ from complex to simpler modulations to maintain connection stability at the cost of a lower bitrate, leading to eventual collapse as increased retransmission adds latency and jitter to the connection.

How Wi-Fi standards can alter the RSSI-speed equation

The impact of signal degradation is not uniform across all technology generations. Each successive Wi-Fi standard introduced innovations in modulation techniques and antenna design (as shown in the table below) to increase the maximum throughput ceiling and the resilience of the signal at the edges of the coverage area.

In this analysis, we focus on the rate of change in download speeds for a given RSSI range rather than look at the absolute throughput to account for differences between the three countries in terms of achievable median download speeds. This approach also excludes the effect of selection bias, for example, that faster broadband subscriptions are generally bundled with more modern CPEs.

Speedtest data represented in the chart below shows that Wi-Fi 4 performance is largely flat across a wide range of RSSI values higher than -40 dBm, creating an early upside ceiling. In Saudi Arabia, Wi-Fi 4 median speeds remain between 30 and 40 Mbps even when the device is close to the router (–20 dBm) and only begin to fall significantly when the signal drops below –60 dBm. In Qatar and the U.A.E., Wi-Fi 4 performance also hits a hard ceiling at around 50 Mbps; as the signal strengthens beyond –40 dBm, download speeds stop growing (excluding a few outliers), plateauing even when the device is very close to the router. This demonstrates the technical limitations of Wi-Fi 4.

Wi-Fi 4 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 4 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Transitioning to Wi-Fi 5 marks a leap in terms of performance compared to Wi-Fi 4 with the use of the 5GHz band, a more complex modulation scheme, refining beamforming, and introducing MU-MIMO. This is reflected in the wider envelope with higher speeds in good-to-excellent signal conditions. However, speed improvements somewhat decelerate around –40 dBm with more incremental increases between 200 Mbps and 300 Mbps.

The chart below shows a steep decline in speed as distance (or number of obstacles) increases, starting from an RSSI of -50 dBm. For example, in Saudi Arabia, speed drops from 193.90 Mbps at –50 dBm to 99.07 Mbps at –70 dBm—a close to 50% loss over 20 dB. Similar rates of speed decline are registered for Qatar and the U.A.E. around this RSSI “breaking point”. This rapid decline can be attributed to the use of the 5 GHz band, which has shorter wavelengths that are more heavily attenuated by concrete and brick.

Wi-Fi 5 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 5 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 6 extended performance further than Wi-Fi 5, as it introduces a higher-order modulation technique (i.e., 1024-QAM), which yields a 25% gain in throughput compared to the previous standard. The chart below, based on Speedtest data, shows two clear inflection points for performance:

When RSSI is above –45 dBm, speed improvements decelerate in Qatar and the U.A.E. and stabilize in Saudi Arabia. This shows that further signal strength, for example, by moving closer to the CPE, provides little to no benefit or even risks receiver saturation. Saudi Arabia trails Qatar and the U.A.E. due to lower Wi-Fi 6 adoption and a smaller share of 500+ Mbps median download speed samples.
When RSSI is lower than –55 dBm, a steep decline in download speeds occurs due to increased packet losses and the necessity for retransmissions.

Wi-Fi 6 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 6 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 7, which incorporates the Multi-Link Operation (MLO) functionality previously detailed, enhances the foundations of Wi-Fi 6 with higher-order modulation (i.e., 4096-QAM) for a further 20% gain in modulation density, which translates into improved speed. As the current peak of wireless innovation, it offers the strongest potential, especially as Gulf operators roll out multi-gigabit home broadband packages.

While fewer samples were collected compared to earlier Wi-Fi standards, data shows that Wi-Fi 7 is most resilient at low RSSI levels, extending the range of excellent performance. For example, Qatar maintains high median speeds (exceeding 500 Mbps) in the –60 to –70 dBm range before the decline accelerates. In Saudi Arabia, even at an RSSI of –80 dBm (close to the noise floor where the connection is supposed to be unusable), the median download speed reached 75.81 Mbps, nearly doubling the performance of Wi-Fi 6 (39.11 Mbps) at the same level. The advanced modulation scheme, alongside features such as OFDMA, MLO, and Preamble Puncturing (see above), explains this resilience, allowing Wi-Fi 7 to maintain a usable SNR at lower power levels than its predecessors.

In the U.A.E., the ‘breaking point’ at which the deterioration of the network accelerates occurs significantly earlier than in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, with an RSSI of around –55 dBm, as shown in the chart below. Median speeds drop from around 641.61 Mbps at –50 dBm to 549.45 Mbps at –55 dBm, and continue to fall to 416.01 Mbps by –59 dBm. This behavior can be attributed to the prevalence of high-rise buildings in the U.A.E and high urban density, which leads to co-channel interference. Even with a strong RSSI of –55 dBm, a high noise floor from neighboring networks can lower the SNR and force the downshifting in modulation earlier than in less dense environments, like in Qatar or Saudi Arabia. The popular use of low-E glass also degrades the quality of the signal at relatively strong power levels because it causes severe multipath interference, which may confuse the receiver, and forces it to downshift its modulation, and as a result, reduce throughput.

Wi-Fi 7 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi 7 Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

How does the spectrum band impact Wi-Fi’s reach and performance

In addition to standards, Wi-Fi performance is dictated by the spectrum it uses. Wi-Fi 4’s advantage is that it propagates through walls and floors thanks to the use of the 2.4 GHz band, but it is extremely bandwidth-limited, offering only three 20 MHz channels and low throughput. In addition, this band can easily get congested by household appliances and neighboring Wi-Fi networks. Ookla’s data shows that, generally, 2.4 GHz download speed starts to level off at around –40 dBm to –50 dBm across all three countries. It should be noted that for a device to maintain a consistent RSSI, it should move much closer to the CPE when using 6 GHz (and closer with 5 GHz) compared to 2.4 GHz. That is why routers often transmit higher-frequency signals at a higher power level to compensate for the natural range loss.

The 5 GHz band increased the available bandwidth, supporting channel widths of up to 160 MHz, allowing much higher speeds but at reduced range and with lower penetrating capacity compared to 2.4 GHz. In Qatar and the U.A.E., we note an “acceleration point” at RSSI of –35 dBm, where throughput begins to improve rapidly as a device moves toward the router, taking full advantage of the inbound fiber line. At the other end, speed deterioration begins to accelerate sharply at –60 dBm for all countries. Median download speed drops by 44%, 40%, and 33% for the U.A.E., Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, respectively, over 10 dB between –60 dBm and –70 dBm.

The 6 GHz band (introduced in Wi-Fi 6E and Wi-Fi 7) supports wider 320 MHz channels and reduced interference, which pushes performance to multi-gigabit speeds. Ookla’s data show a non-linear relationship between download speed and RSSI, as well as different patterns between countries. For example, in Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., speed starts to level off when RSSI is above –50 dBm, while in Qatar, it keeps increasing to touch 1.5 Gbps. Wi-Fi over 6 GHz maintains speed above 500 Mbps for Qatar and the U.A.E., even if the RSSI falls below –50 dBm, then speed deterioration accelerates once it crosses -65 dBm. Yet it remains very high (>100 Mbps at –80 dBm). This shows that while 6 GHz is more prone to absorption by physical barriers, its lack of congestion and more advanced modulation efficiency allow it to maintain very high speeds at further distances.

Wi-Fi Median Download Speed vs. RSSI, Per Frequency Band, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Wi-Fi Median Download Speed vs. RSSI (dBm), Per Frequency Band, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.

Practical solutions address last-mile bottlenecks in the Gulf region

The growing performance envelopes of modern Wi-Fi technologies and increasing levels of resilience to distance and obstacles underscore the importance of upgrading to modern CPEs. However, users should position routers strategically in the home to maximize efficiency. For example, by placing them in a central location, rather than in a corner, and, if possible, mounting them on a shelf or on the ceiling to avoid obstacles such as furniture. They should also keep them away from large metal objects, mirrors, and household appliances like microwaves that might operate in the 2.4 GHz band.

For large villas and apartments typical of the Gulf, a single router is probably insufficient. That is why a mesh network should be considered, as it extends coverage throughout the home. Most modern construction in the Gulf region is hardwired via Ethernet, which facilitates connecting the mesh nodes, bypassing concrete barriers entirely. Finally, allowing the CPE to dynamically select uncongested channels and activating ‘band steering’, which directs connected devices to the faster, less-crowded 5Ghz/6Ghz radio, can also help.

Local ISPs have also been active in ensuring Wi-Fi performance is optimal by offering mesh extenders during registration or upgrade phase, and deploying Fiber-to-the-Room (FTTR) solutions to provide undegraded gigabit access throughout the home. In addition to installing additional hardware, ISPs can validate Wi-Fi setup and performance at installation (or upgrade) time. In this scenario, a technician would perform an indoor site survey and measure RSSI and throughput (in addition to other parameters such as SNR) to advise homeowners on optimal CPE location. ISPs can also be more proactive and remotely run diagnostics to monitor the health of the home network and provide either guidance to end users on how to fix the problem or offer hardware upgrades.

Optimize CPE placement to bridge the gap between provisioned speed and realized performance

Ookla’s data shows that while high-speed fiber connectivity is widespread in the Gulf region, it is the indoor wireless network and surrounding environments that determine the speed that is experienced by end users.

Over the last two decades, successive enhancements were introduced in Wi-Fi standards, modulation techniques, and antenna design to make Wi-Fi reach new speed highs, support more devices, and be more resilient to interference and signal attenuation. This analysis provided evidence that the performance ‘ceiling’ and ‘breaking points’ were pushed further with every new standard. However, the physics of radio frequency propagation and the diverse architectural constraints of Gulf homes suggest moving away from a one-router, one-size-fits-all approach toward more intelligent router and mesh placement, continuous monitoring, and reconfiguration to ensure that the wireless link is as robust as the fiber optic link that feeds it.

Please contact us to learn more about Speedtest Intelligence® and the Speedtest Pulse™ Wi-Fi diagnostic tool.

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.

About the author

Karim Yaici

Karim Yaici is the Lead Industry Analyst at Ookla covering the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region. Previously, he directed Analysys Mason's MEA research program, where he was responsible for telecoms forecasts, market reports, consumer surveys, and custom research.

Linkedin /kyaici

Ookla Research™ Articles

Dave Andersen | December 16, 2025

Loaded Latency and L4S: The Next Frontier for Network Performance

As real-time responsiveness in apps like video conferencing and cloud gaming becomes increasingly important, loaded latency (how a network performs under heavy use) is becoming a key measure of network performance. Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) is a network technology designed to keep that latency stable under load by signaling congestion early, before queues build and delays become noticeable.

Key Takeaways

Loaded latency measures your network’s latency during everyday use: A growing share of user activity now depends on latency staying low and stable, not just on fast speeds. Even small delays can interrupt timing-sensitive tasks, and those delays typically appear only when the network becomes busy.
L4S acts as an early congestion warning system: Traditional congestion control waits for packet loss before signaling a slowdown, but by the time packets are dropping, users may have already noticed a frozen frame, lag spike, or audio glitch. L4S uses Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) marks to warn applications early, before queues build and delays become noticeable.
Low latency is becoming a competitive differentiator for operators: Networks built primarily around throughput don’t always maintain low delays once competing traffic appears. Latency spikes during busy moments affect how subscribers perceive their service, which directly impacts retention and support costs

Access networks have gotten faster and more capable in recent years, thanks to improvements in fiber, DOCSIS, and 5G. These upgrades have pushed peak speeds higher, but throughput is only part of the experience. As more applications depend on real-time responsiveness, latency—especially under load—will play an increasingly important role in shaping overall user experience.

Many applications—cloud gaming, video conferencing, XR, and interactive voice and video AI models—depend on latency that stays low and stable. A network can perform well when traffic is light, with latency close to idle, but those conditions rarely reflect real-world network usage. Once background activity begins, packets start waiting in buffers and latency increases, even on fast connections. Loaded latency measures that effect directly by testing delays while the connection is under heavy use, and Ookla captures this behavior through its standard testing methodology.

The difference between idle latency and latency under load is becoming a defining factor for modern networks. With more network activity shifting toward real-time and interactive use cases, operators are focusing on how their networks perform during busy moments—not just how fast they appear under light conditions.

Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) is one of the most promising ways to keep latency stable under load as networks carry more real-time traffic. Operators enable L4S in the network, and applications benefit when their congestion-control algorithms understand those signals and adjust before users notice a delay. This article looks at why loaded latency matters, how L4S works, and what it enables across today’s networks. For a deeper discussion on loaded latency, check out our full webinar on demand.

Why Loaded Latency Defines Real-World Experience

A growing share of user activity now depends on latency staying low and stable, not just on fast speeds. Even small delays can interrupt timing-sensitive tasks, and those delays typically appear only when the network becomes busy. Loaded latency metrics capture this behavior by showing how performance changes under everyday multitasking—not just in controlled, low-traffic scenarios.

Measuring loaded latency also reveals behaviors that don’t appear in tests where the connection isn’t carrying much traffic. When large uploads or downloads begin, packets start accumulating in buffers and competing for scheduling, and delays can rise even though the connection may look fast under simple tests. Latency tests that measure only idle conditions rarely capture this difference, which is why a connection can appear fine in a quick check but struggle once everyday background activity kicks in.

The rise of real-time and interactive applications has made latency far more noticeable to users. Networks built primarily around throughput do not always maintain low delays once competing traffic appears, which is pushing operators to focus more on performance during busy moments—not just during minimal-traffic conditions.

To measure your own network’s loaded latency, simply run a Speedtest.

How L4S Keeps Latency Low Under Load

Interactive and real-time applications place tighter demands on networks than activities like streaming or web browsing. These applications need latency to stay low and consistent, even when background traffic ramps up. Typical congestion control isn’t designed for that level of responsiveness because it waits for packet loss before signaling a slowdown—by the time loss occurs, users have already seen a frozen frame, lag spike, or audio glitch.

Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) is a network technology that solves that problem by signaling congestion early, before queues build and delays become noticeable. It uses explicit congestion notification (ECN) marks instead of relying on packet loss, giving applications a near-instant signal that they should adjust their sending rate.

This early warning system keeps queues short and delays close to the network’s idle baseline, even when the connection is fully utilized. In practice, this means:

Latency stays low under load
Minimal packet loss or retransmissions
Smoother performance for mixed real-time and background traffic
Applicability across cable, fiber, mobile, and fixed wireless access (FWA) networks

Another key advantage is that L4S doesn’t require new towers, radios, or major hardware overhauls. Operators enable it through software updates to network elements, and applications add support through ECN-aware congestion control. Once L4S is enabled in the network and supported by applications, improvements appear without requiring new infrastructure.

Why Operators Are Prioritizing Low-Latency Architectures

Operators are focusing more on latency than they used to, because it’s now affecting the parts of their business that matter most: support costs, customer satisfaction, and competitive differentiation. When delays spike during busy moments, subscribers interpret it as “the network isn’t working,” even when the underlying issue is momentary latency, not overall capacity. That perception directly affects retention and brand strength.

Many network designs were built to maximize throughput, not to keep latency steady during real-time interactions. That limitation becomes clear when everyday tasks overlap—like a cloud backup running while someone joins a video call. Background uploads sync while users interact with apps that expect instant responses, and those overlapping demands show how older network designs can allow delays to increase under load.

Technologies like L4S give operators new tools to address these architectural gaps. They reduce latency spikes during congestion, keep performance steadier across different types of traffic, and create measurable improvements operators can use for differentiation. A few key forces are driving L4S adoption:

More activity now happens at the same time on a single connection, making delay spikes far more noticeable to users.
Vendor support for L4S has matured, making it practical to deploy at scale.
Operators can roll it out incrementally, improving latency without replacing existing infrastructure

Keeping latency stable during busy periods is becoming a meaningful competitive advantage. The operators investing now are doing it to strengthen service quality, reduce support friction, and prepare for workloads that rely on tight timing rather than speed alone.

The Application Ecosystem Is Moving Toward Stable Low Latency

Many emerging applications require latency to stay low and consistent; even small increases in latency can disrupt the user experience, so many apps depend on mechanisms that prevent delays from rising when networks become busy. As L4S support expands across operating systems, browsers, and real-time audio/video systems, developers will gain a more reliable foundation for experiences that require low latency and immediate responsiveness.

Application support is essential because L4S only delivers its full value when software knows how to react to early congestion signals. When apps can interpret L4S feedback, they adjust their sending rates before delays become visible, keeping interactions smooth even when networks are busy. This coordination between networks and applications is what makes low-latency performance noticeable in real use—not just in controlled testing.

L4S adoption is accelerating in several areas:

Browsers are integrating L4S-aware feedback, especially through WebRTC.
Operating systems and devices are beginning to enable L4S, increasing the number of devices that can benefit.
Cloud gaming and interactive media platforms are testing L4S, improving responsiveness during busy periods.
Developers are gaining clearer signals to react to congestion, allowing their apps to adjust sending rates sooner.

These shifts point toward a broader move to more tightly timed digital experiences, including:

XR and spatial computing, which require the display to update immediately when the user moves.
Live collaboration tools that rely on immediate responsiveness.
AI-driven assistants and interactive agents that need smooth, fast exchanges to feel natural in voice and video models requiring cloud inferencing
New real-time applications that will emerge as latency becomes more predictable.

As more apps and platforms adopt L4S, users will benefit from smoother, more responsive performance in everyday interactions. In addition, operators may have opportunities to offer L4S-enabled service tiers for specific audiences—such as gamers—creating new ways to capture value from these improvements.

The Future of Low-Latency Networking

The next generation of connected experiences will place even greater pressure on latency. Immersive XR environments, remote-operation scenarios, industrial automation, and interactive AI all depend on responses that stay smooth even when networks are busy. When delays increase, these experiences break down, making stable latency a core requirement for what comes next.

Technologies like L4S give operators a practical way to deliver the stable latency that emerging applications demand. As networks adopt modern congestion-control mechanisms like L4S and more applications learn how to react to those early congestion signals, users will see more consistent performance during busy periods.

Low-latency performance is becoming a core competitive requirement. Operators that invest early will be better positioned for the increasingly interactive workloads ahead—workloads that will place even greater emphasis on consistently low latency. To explore loaded latency and L4S in more detail, watch the full webinar on demand.

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.

Ookla Research™ Articles

Dave Andersen | April 15, 2026

World Cup 2026: The Connectivity Picture for Traveling Fans

For travelers heading out of the country to the World Cup this summer, many assume their roaming setup is already taken care of before they leave. The reality is more complicated. Roaming performance varies significantly depending on a traveler’s home operator, not just the country they’re visiting.

The agreements operators negotiate with foreign networks influence which network a device connects to—such as 5G or LTE—and how that connection is handled once it’s on the network. In fact, travelers from the same country, sitting in the same stadium, can have completely different experiences based purely on their operator in their home country.

The stakes are higher for fans in 2026 than they have ever been. FIFA is delivering tickets exclusively through its official app this year, with no printed or offline backup, which means an unreliable connection at the gate could be a real problem.

For a deeper look at roaming and network readiness across all three host countries, check out Ookla analyst Mike Dano’s recent article and our World Cup 2026 roaming webinar, available on demand.

Why Don’t All Fans Get the Same Signal at World Cup 2026?

Roaming performance varies significantly depending on a traveler’s home operator, not just the country they’re visiting. When a traveler lands in a foreign country and their phone connects to a local network, that connection is governed by a roaming agreement—a prenegotiated deal between a user’s home provider and the local operator. Those agreements shape which network the phone can access and whether it can use 5G or is limited to LTE. Most travelers have no visibility into these agreements and no reason to think about them until something goes wrong.

The 2022 World Cup in Qatar illustrated this issue clearly. Argentina’s Personal, Mexico’s Telcel, and Brazil’s Vivo all had roaming agreements that gave their customers access to Qatar’s 5G network. On the other hand, Claro and AT&T Mexico customers were largely limited to LTE and could not access that 5G network at all. Fans with 5G access had a noticeably better experience than those on LTE, a difference shaped in part by roaming agreements.

In 2026, the challenge is bigger. Forty-eight teams, 16 stadiums, and three host countries mean roaming traffic will hit multiple cities simultaneously, and fans may be moving between all three countries over the course of the event. How well a fan’s connection performs depends on roaming agreements, network conditions in each destination, and other factors such as device support and network load.

What to Expect in Each Host Country at World Cup 2026

For fans traveling to a single host city, the roaming question is fairly straightforward compared to those moving between countries. But a significant number of World Cup travelers will move across multiple countries over the course of the tournament, catching games in Dallas one week and Mexico City the next. Each trip places travelers on a different network, governed by different roaming agreements, with meaningfully different performance expectations.

Once fans are inside a stadium, connectivity can be another challenge. Tens of thousands of fans uploading, streaming, and messaging at the same time—especially during kickoff and halftime—can push even well-prepared networks to their limits. Recent Speedtest Intelligence data shows those differences clearly across the three host countries:

United States: U.S. stadiums generally offer the strongest performance of the three host countries. Median download speeds range from 242.19 Mbps at AT&T Stadium to 413.74 Mbps at Mercedes-Benz Stadium, with newer venues delivering noticeably faster results. Across cities and at airports, T-Mobile leads, while Verizon tends to lead at the venues themselves.
Mexico: Travelers will often connect to Telcel’s LTE network, though 5G access varies by roaming agreement. For example, Bell Canada subscribers had no 5G access when roaming on Telcel, while Telus subscribers showed 34% 5G access on the same network. Inside stadiums, median download speeds range from 35.66 Mbps at Estadio Banorte to 53.27 Mbps at Estadio Akron.
Canada: Rogers, Bell, and Telus are closely matched overall, with Telus generally leading at venues in Toronto and Vancouver. Stadium speeds are tightly grouped—140.61 Mbps at BMO Field to 143.37 Mbps at BC Place—though all three venues come in well below U.S. counterparts.

For a deeper look at network performance across host venues, check out our recent article, World Cup 2026 Network Readiness: A Latin American Perspective.

eSIMs and World Cup 2026: What Travelers Should Know

An eSIM is a digital SIM card built into most modern smartphones that allows a traveler to purchase and activate a local or regional data plan without swapping out a physical SIM card. For most fans, the default move is adding an international roaming package before the trip, but an eSIM offers an alternative that’s often cheaper and faster, without relying on whatever roaming agreement their home operator has negotiated.

The difference between an eSIM and an international roaming package can be meaningful. Brazilian travelers roaming into the U.S., for example, often experienced slower speeds than local users when using standard roaming—but those connecting through T-Mobile’s network, which Ookla ranked as the fastest in the country in 2025, saw considerably better results.

For anyone heading to the World Cup this summer, researching eSIM options before departure is worth the time. Setting up an eSim generally takes about ten minutes on most modern smartphones.

How Should Fans Prepare for Roaming at World Cup 2026?

Fans traveling to World Cup 2026 should confirm 5G roaming access by destination, research eSIM options, and download the FIFA app before departure. An eSIM in particular can save a lot of last-minute headaches. Most roaming problems are discovered at the worst possible moment, usually at the airport, or worse, at the stadium gate.

The 2026 World Cup spans three countries with meaningfully different network environments, and an operator that performs well in one host country may have a completely different arrangement in another. A little homework before departure goes a long way:

Confirm 5G access by destination: Check whether the operator supports 5G roaming in each country on the itinerary. Roaming packages often bury that information in the fine print, and LTE-only access in Mexico or Canada can come as a surprise to travelers who assumed 5G was included.
Research eSIM providers: Buying a local eSIM plan before departure can mean faster speeds and more predictable costs than a standard roaming package.
Download and set up the FIFA app before leaving home: Tickets for World Cup 2026 are delivered exclusively through FIFA’s official app, with no printed or offline alternative. Logging in, downloading tickets, and confirming access ahead of time reduces the risk of dealing with account or connectivity issues at the gate.
If traveling across multiple host countries: A single international roaming package does not guarantee consistent performance across the US, Canada, and Mexico. Performance can vary by destination, so earlier steps—such as checking 5G access and considering eSIM options—become more important.

The Bottom Line on Roaming at World Cup 2026

The 2026 World Cup is the largest and most logistically complex version of the tournament ever staged, and the mobile network experience will reflect that complexity. A fan traveling from Brazil to games in Dallas, Mexico City, and Vancouver is effectively navigating three separate network environments, each with its own variables.

That is largely a solvable problem. Checking roaming agreements, researching eSIM options, and confirming the FIFA app is working before departure are not complicated steps. They just require knowing to take them in the first place.

For a deeper dive into network performance across all three host countries, read our full analysis and watch our World Cup 2026 roaming webinar on demand.

About the author

Dave Andersen

Ookla Research™ Articles

Dave Andersen | March 25, 2026

Ookla Partners with Arcep to Bring Speedtest Data to Mon Réseau Mobile Mapping Platform

Ookla® has formed a partnership with Arcep, France’s telecommunications regulator, to integrate Speedtest® crowdsourced data into Arcep’s “Mon Réseau Mobile” mapping platform, giving French consumers richer, more up-to-date insight into mobile network quality across the country.

Arcep’s Mon Réseau Mobile helps users identify the best mobile operator wherever they go in France, from home and work to vacation destinations and everywhere in between. With this partnership, Arcep’s platform now incorporates speed data (both download and upload) and latency drawn from Speedtest, supplementing Arcep’s existing coverage data with real-world, user-generated measurements. This quarter alone, Arcep published more than 420,000 Ookla measurements, with each French department represented by between 300 and 80,000 test points.

Ookla’s anonymized and aggregated data methodology upholds Arcep’s code of conduct, which promotes transparency in how mobile data is collected. Results will be published quarterly for the duration of the one-year partnership, and will also be available as open data on data.gouv.fr.

Speedtest data complements Arcep’s annual mobile service quality survey, which covers 1,700,000 test points, providing users with additional and more up-to-date information. The partnership supports Arcep’s broader data-driven regulation philosophy, reaffirmed under its Ambition 2030 strategy and based on two key principles:

Making regulator-collected data publicly available so consumers can make informed choices about their operator
Incentivizing operators to compete not just on price, but on the quality of service and coverage they offer

The approach also draws on data collected from users themselves—who are often the first to detect market malfunctions—to identify early warning signs and better tailor regulation to their needs. For Arcep and the nation’s consumers, data from the partnership is particularly valuable in rural areas, which have historically had fewer measurement points.

Arcep is not alone in turning to trusted third-party data to inform policy and empower consumers. Ookla works with telecommunications regulators around the world, including the FCC in the United States, the CRTC in Canada, ComReg in Ireland, and IMDA in Singapore, among others, providing the kind of independent, crowdsourced intelligence that helps shape better connectivity outcomes for users everywhere.To learn how Ookla’s data can support your organization, reach out to our team.

About the author

Dave Andersen

Ookla Research™ Articles

Dave Andersen | July 31, 2025

Rethinking Indoor Connectivity: Why It Matters More Than Ever

Mobile networks have seen major upgrades in recent years—from 5G rollouts to expanded spectrum to denser infrastructure—but indoor coverage is still a major weak spot. Whether in office towers, schools, hospitals, or transportation hubs, buildings often block or weaken cellular signals, creating a frustrating experience for users and a missed opportunity for mobile network operators (MNOs). In many cases, indoor coverage gaps pose more than an inconvenience; they create real risks for public safety and limit economic potential for property owners.

This problem is nothing new, but in many developed markets, it’s actually getting worse. Our earlier research explored how a combination of higher frequency 5G spectrum (which struggles to penetrate buildings), newer construction materials like low-emissivity (low-E) glass, and the sunsetting of legacy 2G and 3G networks has deepened indoor coverage challenges. Meanwhile, mobile data usage continues to concentrate indoors, and networks built to prioritize outdoor coverage often don’t deliver the performance users now expect inside buildings.

In this article, we’ll break down the key challenges facing in-building mobile coverage, explore solutions, and show how Ookla’s data can help improve outcomes for consumers, operators, and property owners. For a deeper dive into these topics, watch our recent webinar on-demand, “Reimagining In-Building Cellular: Closing the Coverage Gap.”

The Data Gap: What Regulators Miss About Indoor Coverage

Accurate data is the foundation of good policy. But when it comes to indoor connectivity, many public maps and benchmarks focus on outdoor or predicted coverage and ignore what users actually experience once they step inside.

Higher-frequency 5G spectrum, signal-blocking materials like low-E glass, and the shutdown of legacy networks have all made reliable in-building coverage harder to achieve in many developed markets.

Data from Ookla’s Cell Analytics™ platform highlights the scale of the problem. In cities like London and Paris, building-level data reveals large clusters of poor indoor performance, even in areas that draw large numbers of people and appear well-served on public maps. In many cases, users experience degraded 5G coverage and fallback to low-band spectrum that offers limited capacity, leading to a poorer quality of experience. This disconnect between perception and reality underscores several important points:

Traditional coverage maps often present an overly optimistic view of network performance—especially indoors—based on computer-modeled predictions rather than reflecting the actual signal conditions enjoyed by end users.
Crowdsourced data reveals large pockets of poor in-building coverage in major global cities.
These blind spots can lead to misaligned investments and missed opportunities to improve service where it’s most needed.
Without building-level insights, policymakers and operators lack the visibility required to close the indoor coverage gap.

Better indoor outcomes start with a more accurate understanding of what users actually experience. Without that understanding, it’s difficult to allocate funding or resources where they’ll make a difference.

Why Indoor Coverage is a Public Safety Issue

Dropped calls and dead zones inside buildings are more than a nuisance—they can be dangerous. In emergencies, people expect to reach help from anywhere, but many buildings still lack the coverage needed for reliable 911 (or equivalent) service. And as emergency response operations increasingly rely on mobile networks and broadband applications, buildings without reliable service could put lives at risk.

When people in distress cannot quickly reach emergency services, every second counts. A one-minute delay in dispatching help can increase cardiac arrest mortality rates by 1–2% and raise fire damage by up to 20%. FCC modeling during the E911 modernization effort found that improving vertical (z-axis) location accuracy—made possible partly through better indoor mobile coverage—could save thousands of lives each year,

Here’s why indoor connectivity matters for public safety—and what’s standing in the way:

Indoor coverage gaps can delay or prevent emergency calls. People expect to have mobile service everywhere—but many buildings don’t deliver it when it matters most.
First responders increasingly depend on mobile broadband—like apps, video, and real-time data—which all require strong indoor cellular coverage to work reliably.
Buildings that lack coverage can disrupt first responder communication and coordination.
Fire and building codes in many areas require indoor coverage for public safety radios (not general mobile service), but enforcement varies widelyBetter indoor coverage also helps 911 responders find people faster—especially in multi-story buildings. Today’s emergency systems use more advanced location technology, like device-based hybrid (DBH) methods, which combine GPS, Wi-Fi, and barometric sensors. These signals can now estimate not just your location on a map, but also what floor you’re on. As of April 2025, the FCC requires carriers to provide this vertical accuracy—within about 10 feet (or one floor)—for 80% of wireless 911 calls.

That level of precision can save critical time. If first responders know exactly where to go, they can reach people faster—often shaving a full minute off response times. In serious emergencies like cardiac arrests, where every second matters, that minute could save a life.

In-building coverage should be treated with the same urgency as other public safety infrastructure. Lives may depend on the ability to communicate from inside a building—whether by call, text, or other mobile tools.

New Models for Indoor Connectivity: The Rise of Shared Infrastructure

A new funding model is taking hold across the industry, with more venue owners now willing to foot the bill for in-building deployments as part of broader efforts to improve tenant experiences and stay competitive. With operators focused on outdoor network coverage and typically investing in custom in-building solutions only for the highest-profile venues (like stadiums), many building owners are realizing they’ll need to take the lead if they want better indoor coverage.

One solution gaining traction is the neutral host model, where a single shared infrastructure supports multiple mobile operators within a building. Instead of each carrier deploying its own system, a neutral host handles the design, installation, and operation—reducing cost and complexity for everyone involved. Key benefits of shared deployments include:

Neutral hosts design, build, and operate infrastructure that supports multiple MNOs through a single system.
Shared systems eliminate the inefficiencies (physical equipment and cost duplications) of carrier-by-carrier installations.
The model is particularly effective in transit systems, stadiums, airports, and other high-traffic venues where all operators need coverage and there are significant space constraints
Participation often hinges on securing an anchor tenant—an MNO willing to be the first onboard.

Neutral host systems reduce complexity while improving results for everyone involved. As demand grows, expect shared infrastructure to become the norm, not the exception.

The Building Owner Equation: What’s the ROI?

Even when building owners recognize the value of strong indoor connectivity, calculating the return on investment isn’t always straightforward. While features like upgraded lobbies or new HVAC systems have clear costs and resale value, cellular deployments can feel abstract by comparison.

Still, connectivity is increasingly a requirement for tenants—not a perk. With hybrid work schedules, hot-desking, and mobile-first workflows, workers now expect reliable coverage throughout the building—from shared lounges to meeting rooms to wherever they can take a call or join a video meeting. If a space can’t support consistent connectivity across both cellular and Wi-Fi, it becomes harder to attract and retain tenants.

As connectivity becomes a baseline expectation in modern workspaces, building owners face growing pressure to deliver. Here’s what that means in practice:

Tenants expect strong indoor coverage (both cellular and Wi-Fi) as part of a modern workspace.
Poor connectivity can influence leasing decisions and renewal rates.
Owners of mid-sized or lower-profile buildings are often underserved by MNOs—and may need to take the lead on providing connectivity.
Without benchmarks or transparency, it’s hard to know where a building stands—or how to improve.

Reliable connectivity increasingly factors into occupancy, retention, and tenant satisfaction. For owners, strong mobile coverage is becoming a basic competitive differentiator.

Policy Can Make or Break Progress

Technology alone won’t fix the indoor coverage problem. Regulation and planning play a critical role—and some countries are showing what works. Leading global markets like Singapore, South Korea, and Hong Kong have implemented policies that require mobile-ready infrastructure in new buildings as a condition of zoning approval. This ensures operators have access to deploy equipment without facing prohibitive delays or costs.

South Korea offers one of the most comprehensive policy approaches to indoor mobile coverage anywhere in the world. New building codes require in-building mobile infrastructure—like risers, conduit, power, and equipment rooms—for a wide range of structures, including high-rise buildings (16 floors or taller), large buildings over 1,000 square meters, any building with underground levels, apartment complexes with 500 or more units, and all subway stations.

The Korean government also sets clear coverage requirements. Every mobile operator must provide service at all subway stations and high-speed rail hubs using mid-band 3.5 GHz spectrum. To make sure performance matches expectations, public scorecards put serious weight on indoor results: about half of the testing in South Korea’s national 5G Quality Evaluation takes place inside buildings like malls, hospitals, and campuses. Carriers that underperform can face financial penalties and public callouts. Together, these policies ensure strong indoor coverage is built in from the start—and that operators are held accountable for delivering it.

That kind of clear policy framework offers a model for other markets to follow. For countries like the U.S. and those across Europe, there are several clear policy opportunities to help close the indoor coverage gap:

Require cellular-ready infrastructure (ducting, risers, equipment space) in building codes.
Expedite permitting for indoor mobile deployments in public buildings like schools and hospitals.
Encourage government facilities to adopt 5G and in-building solutions as part of national strategy.
Develop transparent coverage certification or ratings to drive competition and investment.
Support more flexible use of spectrum for shared or private indoor deployments.

The bottom line is that indoor coverage can’t be an afterthought in policy. Clear requirements and streamlined permitting are essential for creating long-term change.

How Ookla Is Helping Improve Indoor Connectivity

Ookla supports better in-building connectivity through a powerful set of tools that deliver actionable, real-world insights. These solutions help operators, regulators, and property owners understand performance at the building level—revealing where indoor coverage falls short and where investment is most needed. Here’s how each group is using Ookla’s data to drive better outcomes:

Operators use Cell Analytics and Speedtest Intelligence® to identify coverage gaps, prioritize in-building upgrades, optimize spectrum deployment, and validate improvements.
Regulators and policymakers rely on Ookla data to support evidence-based planning, improve public reporting, and track progress over time.
Building owners use Speedtest results and building-level insights to assess tenant experiences, benchmark performance, and guide connectivity investments.

Ookla’s insights into indoor connectivity continue to play a key role in helping the industry move beyond outdated assumptions and improve mobile performance where people really need it.

Looking Ahead: Closing the Indoor Coverage Gap

Indoor coverage is no longer a secondary concern. As more mobile activity happens inside buildings, strong indoor performance is now essential—for everything from emergency response to tenant satisfaction. Yet this critical area still suffers from outdated assumptions, inconsistent data, and underinvestment.

Fixing the problem requires a coordinated approach—one that brings together network operators, property owners, infrastructure providers, policymakers, and data partners. \With better visibility through tools like Cell Analytics and Speedtest Intelligence, there’s a real opportunity to target improvements where indoor connectivity continues to fall short.

To explore these topics in more detail, watch our full webinar on-demand. And stay tuned—more in-building connectivity research and insights are coming soon!

About the author

Dave Andersen

Ookla Research™ Articles

Ookla | October 24, 2025

How Globe Uses Ookla Data to Deliver the Most Consistent Mobile Experience in the Philippines [Case Study]

In a highly competitive and mobile-first Philippine market, Globe Telecom, the leading mobile network operator in the country, is committed to delivering superior customer experience everyday. Recognizing the need to champion consistent user experience as key to customer satisfaction, Globe sets an ambitious goal: to establish itself as the Most Consistent Mobile Network in the Philippines.

Knowing that marketing claims must rest on neutral evidence, Globe turned to Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence®—specifically the Consistency Score, which tracks the share of user tests that meet a minimum threshold of 5 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload.

Globe boosted speeds and focused on consistent downlink and uplink performance, because as Ookla’s own research confirms, sustained throughput along with typical app requirements is a stronger predictor of user experience than occasional speed peaks. Leveraging Speedtest Intelligence® insights, Globe pinpointed where to upgrade capacity, align cross-functional teams, and guide strategic network investments.

Situation

Globe Telecom set out to differentiate its brand and elevate user experience by becoming the country’s Most Consistent Mobile Network. Ookla confirms that a company’s Consistency Score is a stronger predictor of everyday app performance than peak speed alone, because it shows how often users actually receive ‘good-enough’ speeds for streaming, browsing, and video calls. Guided by these insights, Globe pinpointed upgrade priorities and invested where consistent performance would matter most to customers.

Download the full case study

Check out our full case study to discover how Globe leveraged Ookla data to become the most consistent mobile provider in the Philippines.

Download case study

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.

Ookla Research™ Articles

Ookla | September 10, 2025

Rated #1: How DITO Grew its Brand with Speedtest Awards™ [Case Study]

Entering a market long dominated by two established mobile providers, DITO faced an uphill climb in building brand recognition and growing its subscriber base. With a commercial launch in 2021, the company set an ambitious goal: to connect every Filipino to the people, places, and things that matter most—through reliable, high-speed mobile service and a fresh, customer-first approach.

That mission quickly gained traction. DITO’s dedication to service and innovation earned the company more than 13 million subscribers in just three years. But building trust in such a competitive market takes more than scale. It takes proof.

In 2023 and 2024, DITO received a major endorsement of its network quality and customer satisfaction when it was named the #1 Rated Mobile Network in the Philippines by Ookla® three consecutive times. The Speedtest Award™, based on real user feedback from Speedtest® Intelligence data, became a cornerstone of DITO’s marketing strategy, offering trusted, third-party validation of its brand promise.

Situation

Launching in 2021, DITO entered a saturated and highly competitive mobile market in the Philippines. With entrenched competitors and decades of consumer loyalty behind them, the legacy operators had a clear advantage. DITO, in contrast, needed to prove itself from the ground up: it had to build brand awareness, earn trust, and deliver on the promise of a better mobile experience.

DITO expanded rapidly, reaching over 13 million subscribers by 2024. That growth was fueled by aggressive network investments, expanded 4G and 5G availability, and a strong focus on customer-centric service.

As DITO gained momentum, established competitors also ramped up their efforts, making it even more important for DITO to find fresh ways to differentiate its brand. It needed a campaign that blended credibility with emotional resonance—one that would validate its achievements while deepening brand affinity. That’s where the Speedtest Award came into the picture.

Download the full case study

Check out our full case study to learn more about DITO’s “Sa Puso Ko” campaign to celebrate its Speedtest Award as the #1 Rated Mobile Network in the Philippines.

Download case study

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.

Ookla Research™ Articles

Dave Andersen | July 1, 2025

Speed Plus Experience: How Speedtest’s New Awards Capture What Really Matters to Users

As our digital lives grow more connected and complex, expectations for network performance are rising. It’s no longer just about speed — it’s about whether your internet experience works the way you need it to: consistently, smoothly, and without frustration. As those expectations evolve, so must the way we measure and recognize great networks. New expectations call for new testing — and that means new awards.

That’s why we’ve updated the Speedtest Awards™ methodology to better reflect what really matters to consumers. The changes include smarter performance criteria and introduce two new awards: Best Mobile Network and Best Fixed Network. These awards — along with updates to our Fastest Network recognition — now factor in not just raw speed, but also real-world experience metrics like responsiveness and quality of experience.

This article explores Ookla’s updated Speedtest Awards™ methodology, designed to offer a more comprehensive view of network performance. We’ll explain how these new awards combine crucial QoE and QoS insights, and why speed still plays a key role in the bigger performance picture, especially when paired with real-world experience metrics.

Why Speed Still Matters

Quality of Experience (QoE) and Quality of Service (QoS) metrics offer valuable depth into network performance — and among them, speed stands out as the most tangible and universally understood. Speed is a key QoS measure that reflects the capacity of a network and continues to play a central role in enabling new digital use cases. That role is cyclical: faster speeds unlock new applications, which in turn drive demand for even greater speeds — continually pushing the boundaries of what networks can deliver.

Speed is foundational because it:

Affects how quickly users can load and upload content and use apps: From instant webpage loading to rapid file downloads, speed is critical.
Acts as a high-level indicator of overall network health and capacity: A fast network generally indicates robust infrastructure and sufficient capacity to handle demand.
Enables emerging and demanding use cases: High-bandwidth applications like 4K streaming, virtual reality (VR), and cloud gaming are only possible with consistently high speeds.

In short, speed isn’t going anywhere. It continues to be critical for users and is a useful and widely understood metric for operators — especially when paired with QoE metrics.

A More Holistic View: Speedtest Connectivity Score™

While speed remains a major part of the equation, the true measure of a network’s performance lies in how it enables real-world activities. The Speedtest Connectivity Score™ provides a rich, contextual understanding of the actual consumer experience by factoring in not just speed, but also the responsiveness (or latency) of common online tasks like web browsing and video streaming. This holistic approach helps operators understand what truly matters to their users.

The Speedtest Connectivity Score is calculated on a 0-100 scale and comprises three key components:

Speed Score: It combines download and upload speeds with latency to provide a smarter, more complete measure of a network’s overall responsiveness.
Web Browsing Score: This measures the responsiveness of web page loading, reflecting how quickly and smoothly users can navigate the internet.
Video Streaming Score: This assesses how well a network handles video playback, reflecting the ability to stream popular services smoothly and without buffering or interruptions.

The components of the Speedtest Connectivity Score — speed, web browsing responsiveness, and video streaming quality — work together to provide a more complete view of real-world network performance. By blending speed with Quality of Experience (QoE) insights, the Speedtest Connectivity Score reflects what matters most to users: the ability to seamlessly browse, stream, and stay connected in their everyday lives.

The Ookla Difference: Measuring What Matters Most

Ookla stands apart by delivering superior insights on both Quality of Service (QoS) and Quality of Experience (QoE) — thanks to our unmatched scale, methodology, and real-world data.

Scale and volume of QoS testing: Our consumer-initiated Speedtests are trusted worldwide by millions every day. Consumers actively hit the “Go” button, generating 11+ million daily tests. This huge volume of consumer-initiated tests offers a trusted, real-world snapshot of network performance that’s both broad and representative.

Testing anywhere users go: Our testing reaches wherever phones go — indoors, rural areas, stadiums, highways, and beyond. This ensures our data captures performance at the times and places consumers actually use their devices, unlike other testing methods.

Scale and relevance of real-world QoE measurements: We offer QoE insights like web browsing and video streaming across more than 200 countries. And those web browsing and video streaming insights come directly from when consumers are actively engaged on their phones — not from passive background collection, not from synthetic testing, and not from estimates of what the consumer experience should be like based solely on RF conditions. This direct measurement delivers a practical benchmark of how well networks support the activities consumers care about most.

With a combination of unparalleled scale with real-world relevance, Ookla provides operators and users alike with the most precise and actionable view of network performance — both in speed and quality.

Introducing New Speedtest Awards™: Recognizing True Performance

Our commitment to accurately reflecting the consumer network experience is driving the evolution of our Speedtest Awards. The new methodology, which incorporates QoE and QoS insights, is designed to recognize operators who truly excel in delivering superior connectivity.

Best Fixed Network Award: Highlights operators excelling in both Quality of Service (QoS) and Quality of Experience (QoE), reflecting overall fixed network performance that matters to users.
Best Mobile Network Award: Recognizes mobile operators delivering strong, dependable performance by measuring both QoS and QoE to capture real-world user experience.

Tying It All Together: Speed and QoE for a Complete Picture of Performance

Speed and QoE aren’t competing metrics—it’s quite the opposite. They work together to give a complete picture of network performance. Speed shows how fast the network can go, acting as a quick snapshot of its capacity. QoE reflects how the connection actually feels to the user and how well it supports real-world activities. When combined, speed and QoE provide a stronger, more balanced view of performance than either metric alone.

This comprehensive approach to network performance is precisely why Ookla’s Speedtest Awards™ are evolving to incorporate not just raw speed, but also key QoE metrics through the Speedtest Connectivity Score. By acknowledging both the underlying power and the real-world usability of a network, our awards highlight providers who truly excel in delivering superior connectivity.

Speedtest has long given the cleanest and most trusted view of speed performance; we believe our QoE data is similarly a touchpoint for how this type of data should be collected. Providing the best and most relevant view of performance for today’s connectivity needs means pushing beyond traditional testing methods and metrics. That’s what we’re offering. It’s better data, for better insights, to help create better connectivity for all.

Interested in learning how these changes might impact you? Contact us—we’re happy to chat.

About the author

Dave Andersen

Ookla Research™ Articles

Sylwia Kechiche | June 27, 2022

Dtac and True Merger Talks Point to a Need to Address Unequal Footing in Thailand's 5G

The planned merger between True Corporation (“True”) and Total Access Communication (“dtac”) in Thailand is currently awaiting regulatory approval. The announcement of the merger or “amalgamation” as the involved companies like to call it, wasn’t unexpected as rumors around dtac’s owner Telenor’s plans to exit Thailand circulated for a while. Besides, Telenor hopes to merge its Malaysian operations and it sold its operations in Myanmar in March 2022. On November 20, 2021, True and dtac entered a non-binding memorandum of understanding to pursue the “amalgamation.” In April 2022, the two companies received the approval from their shareholders for the merger and to create a new listed company — NewCo — despite not knowing what the conditions or measures of the deal will be. In June 2022, a legal subcommittee of NBTC concluded that the telecom regulator has the power to approve or dissolve the planned merger. In this article we will assess the impact of the proposed merger on the Thai telecommunications market by examining its current state.

Key takeaways

Thailand’s 5G performed well compared to its regional counterparts due to a timely 5G network roll out and dedicated 5G spectrum availability.
Based on mobile performance, Thailand is a market dominated by one player — AIS. It had a lead in terms of 4G performance and that lead has been extended further with 5G. The third operator in the market, dtac, is not competitive on 5G due to its limited spectrum holdings (dtac’s 5G performance is equivalent to AIS’ 4G).
The merged operator, NewCo, could provide more robust competition to AIS while also having the scale to invest in 5G. While this will turn Thailand into a two-player market, examples of mergers and acquisitions in other countries suggest a number of measures will be most likely put in place: spectrum divestment, more capacity allocated to MVNOs, converged and innovative offerings, all of which can potentially offset its negative impact.

Thailand’s 5G performs well compared to its regional counterparts

5G deployment in Thailand is comparable in terms of 5G speeds and 5G Availability with more developed countries in the region such as Singapore, even though the country previously lagged behind its peers in assigning 3G and LTE spectrum.

In our recent article, we concluded that the country’s regulator, The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC), has been instrumental in establishing Thailand as a leading 5G market in the region. In fact, Thailand was one of the first markets to launch 5G in the Asia-Pacific region, with AIS and TrueMove H both launching commercial 5G services in Q1 2020, shortly after the conclusion of the country’s 5G auction. The Thai government plays an active role in ensuring 5G can bring societal benefits, e.g., improving government services and extending healthcare access. Some of the campaigns include establishing a telemedicine center, setting up a 5G network for smart city management, developing a pilot project on digital farming in Songkhla Lake Basin, and using 5G connectivity for pandemic related measures as tourism was reopening in Phuket.

In Q1 2022, Speedtest Intelligence® data put Thailand on par with its regional peers such as Australia and China and ahead of the Philippines, Japan, Singapore and New Zealand in terms of 5G Availability (the proportion of users on 5G-capable devices who spend a majority of their time on 5G networks).

In February 2020, NBTC assigned spectrum for 5G use across low (700 MHz), mid (2,600 MHz), and high (26 GHz) frequency bands. It also plans a further auction of mid-band spectrum in 2022 in the 3.5 GHz band, which was vacated in September 2021 by Thaicom, a satellite provider. All of the countries in the comparison above assigned spectrum in the mid-band frequency, which is the sweet spot for 5G in terms of coverage and capacity. In South Korea, which came first in terms of median 5G download speed, the government allocated a total of 2,680 MHz of spectrum including 280 MHz in the 3.5 GHz band and 2,400 MHz in the 28 GHz spectrum band. Korean provider KT is also using a standalone 5G network, a form of 5G that doesn’t rely on 4G LTE as the foundation of the 5G experience, which should provide faster speeds and lower latency than non-standalone (NSA) 5G networks. In fact, a few operators in the analyzed countries have launched 5G SA including China (all operators), Singapore (M1, Singtel, and Starhub), Australia (Telstra and Vodafone), Japan (Softbank), and Thailand (AIS).

AIS wins on 5G performance in Thailand, TrueMove H on 5G Availability

In Q1 2022, AIS came as the fastest operator in terms of 5G speeds, this was also the case in Q4 2021 as per our recent article. According to Speedtest Intelligence, AIS recorded a median 5G download speed of 261.19 Mbps and 5G upload speed of 40.57 Mbps during Q1 2022. AIS launched 5G NSA (non-standalone) in February 2020 using the 700 MHz, 2.6 GHz and 26 GHz bands, followed by 5G SA in July 2020 in cooperation with Huawei. AIS deployed 5G CA (New Radio Carrier Aggregation) by integrating its mid-band (2600 MHz) and low band (700 MHz) spectrum. This in turn gave a 1.7x boost to the operator’s data transmission capabilities. TrueMove H was second for 5G download speed, with a median of 197.79 Mbps and a 5G upload speed of 25.52 Mbps. The lack of mid-band spectrum limits dtac’s performance, which showed a median 5G download speed of 32.70 Mbps and 19.18 Mbps upload.

The ranking shifts when we compare 5G Availability – the percentage of users on 5G-capable devices that spend a majority of time with access to 5G networks. TrueMove H came first for 5G Availability at 37.9% during Q1 2022, a three percentage point improvement over Q4 2021. This was well above the rest of the Thai operators: AIS (18.7%), and dtac (7.9%). Based on our data AIS & TrueMove H had 5G Availability in all 77 provinces but TrueMove H 5G Availability was higher in most of the provinces as per Q1 2022.

This disparity we see between TrueMove H and AIS is largely down to the fact that AIS requires users to subscribe to a 5G tariff, as opposed to TrueMove H which allows greater access to 5G-enabled devices on its network. TrueMove H’s 5G Availability remains the highest via a combination of coverage and 5G handsets. The operator’s initial focus was to roll out 5G to most densely populated areas such as the Bangkok metropolitan area, in which over 90% of population is covered by 5G, followed by key locations. At the time of 5G network launch, TrueMove H offered 30 models of 5G smartphone under promotional prices, True 5G VR4K vision and True5G VR Headset, IoT equipment as well as gadgets. AIS rolled out a 5G network out to all 77 provinces, covering 78% of the population in Q1 2022, with a year end target of 85% population coverage.

At the same time, Thai operators continue to grow the number of 5G users, expanding the addressable market beyond early adopters; for example TrueMove H saw its 5G user base increase to 2.6 million in Q1 2022, AIS had 2.8 million 5G package subscribers and 3 million 5G handset on AIS network in Q1 2022.

Songkhla tops the charts for median 5G download speed

Every operator takes a unique approach to regional strategy, so we looked closely at 5G performance in select regions during Q1 2022. Songkhla came top when it comes to median 5G download speed (253.44 Mbps), but ranked last in 5G Availability (8.9%), which points to low network congestion due to a lower number of users.

We removed dtac from the operator level comparison due to the low sample size. AIS came top in almost all regions, apart from Khon Kaen. AIS’s fastest median 5G download speed (313.35 Mbps) was in Songkhla.

Bangkok has the highest 5G Availability

In Q1 2022, Bangkok had the highest 5G Availability (30.1%), Songkhla ranked last in 5G Availability (8.9%). Ookla 5G Map® shows 215 commercial 5G deployments in the Bangkok area. What’s more, because Bangkok is more affluent than the rest of the country, smartphone adoption, including 5G, is higher than in the rest of the country. Due to the pandemic, Thai operators have actually accelerated their 5G rollout, starting with hospitals in Bangkok. At the end of 2021, AIS reported that its 5G network covered more than 99% of the population in Bangkok compared to 76% across the whole country. At the end of Q1 2022, dtac’s 5G network covered 34 provinces, though we have excluded dtac from the above ranking due to low sample count. Dtac has been focusing on network expansion using the 700 MHz band, resulting in capacity and coverage uplift, yet it is still lagging behind competition in uptake. Dtac reported that it will prioritize 5G expansion by expanding coverage to all of Thailand’s 77 provinces within the Q3 2022.

4G Availability close enough, AIS in the lead for 4G speeds

The leaderboard for 4G LTE performance in Thailand looked very similar to the 5G one during Q1 2022. AIS was in the lead (31.16 Mbps for download/17.51 Mbps upload), followed by TrueMove H (23.38 Mbps for download/10.80 Mbps for upload), and dtac (13.57 Mbps for download/ 5.05 Mbps upload), there was a major difference, however, when 4G performance is considered separately to that on 5G. AIS’s median download speed on all technologies combined was almost eight times higher than dtac’s, but AIS’s median download speed on 4G was just double of dtac’s. Furthermore, there was no substantial difference in terms of 4G Availability – the percentage of users on all devices who spend the majority of their time connected to 4G technology both roaming and on-network – across Thai mobile networks.

Consolidation wave across Asia-Pacific could stifle competition

Merger and acquisitions activity is heating up across the Asia-Pacific region with deals on the table across a number of countries including Thailand, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Indonesia. Thus far, only the merger between Indosat and Tri in Indonesia has received regulatory approval and been completed. This is true in Europe as well, as we discussed in our recent article, with recent examples including the agreed joint venture between MasMovil and Orange in Spain and Iliad’s recent bid for Vodafone Italy.

A number of studies have attempted to assess the impact of mergers. For instance, in 2017 GSMA analyzed the impact of the 2012 Hutchison/Orange merger in Austria (a 4-to-3 merger) on quality using difference-in-differences (DD) and synthetic control methods. The study concluded that the merger in Austria had a positive and statistically significant effect on quality outcomes. The U.K. telecom regulator, Ofcom, in its Economic Discussion Paper on Market structure, investment and quality in the mobile industry analyzed a number of M&A activities. It concluded that the results of merger-specific analysis are mixed, as there is no evidence that mergers have generated improvements in network quality to the benefit of consumers. Instead, there is some evidence that both investment and average download speeds declined following some of these mergers. Closer to Thailand, Indosat Ooredoo and Hutchison 3 Indonesia (Tri) merged into Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison (IOH) to create a number two player in Indonesia with 26.3% market share as of Q1 2022. It was conditioned upon a number of factors, though, around improved geographic reach and network performance.

However, there are rare examples of a market moving towards duopoly. In 2011, Philippines mobile market became a duopoly after PLDT acquired Digitel. The deal was studied by regulators for seven months, the main issue being the large amount of the country’s 3G spectrum that the merged operator would control. It eventually passed on condition that PLDT gave up the 10 MHz 3G license held by one of its subsidiaries. Almost a decade later, a third player entered the Philippines, which we will discuss in an upcoming article.

The shape of the Thai mobile market

If approved, M&A would bring more MVNOs to the market

With close to 100 million mobile connections, Thailand’s SIM penetration of the population is 140%, meaning that on average a mobile subscriber has 1.58 SIMs. The market is served by four operators: AIS, DTAC, TrueMove H and the government owned National Telecom (NT). NT was formed in January 2021 via a merger of Communications Authority of Thailand (CAT) Telecom and TOT (Telephone Organization of Thailand).

AIS, whose backers include Singtel Group, led the market with 44.5% of all mobile subscriptions, equivalent to 44.6 million subscribers, at the end of March 2022. By contrast, TrueMove H held 33.4% of the market share (32.5 million subscribers), with dtac claiming a 19.8% market share with 19.9 million subscribers. According to industry estimates, NT had less than 3.5 million subscribers in Q1 2022, equating to 3.3% market share. Currently, MVNOs hold a miniscule market share of the Thai market, under 1% combined. NT is the sole operator hosting MVNOs in Thailand since MVNOs were introduced in 2009, despite the fact that all of operators licenses’ terms and conditions have a clause that a minimum 10% of their spectrum capacity should be allocated to MVNOs. Opening up the market to MVNOs is often one of the conditions for M&A to go ahead.

The topic of mergers is widely discussed in Thailand; there have been a number of concerns raised. Thai consumer advocates and academics voice their disapproval of the M&A, saying consumers will be at a disadvantage due to less competition in the market. For instance, the People’s Network Protecting Public Interest claimed that the market would become a de facto duopoly with foreseen price increases of 20-30% in the long term. NT Telecom, which is both a competitor and a minority stakeholder in dtac, disapproved of the True-dtac merger.

The discussion as to who should approve the merger was put to rest when a legal subcommittee of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) concluded the telecom regulator has the power to approve or prohibit the planned merger. NBTC is still conducting studies on the impact of the merger, both short-term and long-term, as well setting up a number of independent committees to advise on the best course of action. Most recently, a panel that was tasked with determining whether the merger would have economic impact, M&A could reduce Thailand’s GDP growth by between 0.05% and 1.99%, and increase mobile prices by 2.03%-19.5% depending on the degree of collusion. Against this backdrop, it is hard to imagine that the merger would get a green light.

If the merger goes ahead, the newly combined entity will become the number one player in Thailand with a 52.2% market share, ahead of the current market leader, AIS. However, it takes time for the companies to merge their operations and it is most likely that in the short term both companies will use their separate brands while working out the go to market proposition. Also the companies’ execs at a recent seminar were at pains to assure that there will be no price hikes if the merger goes ahead, instead because of the economies of scale there will be more investment into the market resulting in more innovation and better customer experience.

If approved, M&A would change the spectrum landscape

As it stands right now, AIS has the largest amount of 5G spectrum — a total of 1,330 MHz — across low-, mid-, and high-frequency bands. In May 2022, AIS added a further 10 MHz of bandwidth on the 700 MHz spectrum from NT due to the deal with NT Telecom. With this deal, AIS will increase its bandwidth to 40 MHz from August 2022 onward, which should improve its 5G coverage.

AIS and TrueMove H deployed their initial 5G networks on the 2600 MHz spectrum, while dtac used frequencies in the 26 GHz band. All operators, except for NT, also deployed 5G in the 700 MHz spectrum band when it became available for use in early 2021, following the completion of broadcasting service migration. NT is yet to deploy 5G.

Thanks to the merger, dtac would have access to True’s mid-band spectrum, which should substantially improve its performance. Furthermore, there is another C-band spectrum auction planned in 2022 (3.4-3.7 GHz band). This should have a positive effect on the 5G download speeds as we have seen in the USA when since deployment in the C-band, Verizon’s 5G speeds have set it apart from AT&T.

However, it is common practice that operators that undergo mergers have to divest part of their spectrum as an M&A condition. For example, this was the case when Hutchison 3G acquired Orange in Austria, Hutchison 3G bought Telefonica in Ireland and Telefonica merged with E-Plus in Germany.

The benefits of scale are obvious

Fixed Mobile Convergence (FMC) bundling is offered by most operators in Thailand due to competitive pressures coming from TrueMove H and AIS. The merger could enable convergent offerings from dtac too, which is solely a mobile player, and would allow it to offer better service in terms of coverage and further expand its market share. According to Analysys Mason, FMC penetration will continue to increase in Thailand, and if the merger is blocked, dtac’s competitive standing will be further disadvantaged.

On the other hand, True Corporation has a portfolio of services:

TrueMove H — mobile operator, which also offers NB-IoT (Narrowband IoT).
TrueOnline — broadband internet and fixed-line. It is the largest fixed broadband provider with a 46.7% market share.
TrueVision — Pay TV, digital TV and content provider and an online game and influencer network; 3.5M subscribers.
True Digital Group — Digital media, data analytics, cybersecurity, IoT, integrated digital health, digital solutions and True Digital Academy.

The merged operator NewCo would remain at its core a telecommunication player but would extend its reach to support the digital transformation of Thailand, in line with Thailand 4.0 vision. The quoted benefits of the “amalgamation” include:

Improved 5G coverage with better network quality, reliability and speed.
More value-driven convergence or products and services thanks to access to a wider ecosystem of partners.
Utilization of consolidated infrastructure such as outlets to expand its outreach to deliver on Thailand 4.0 policy.
Greater opex and capex cost efficiencies when deploying 5G networks thanks to the benefit of scale. As a result improving the quality of telecom infrastructure and customer satisfaction.
Streamlined efficiencies will deliver better consumer experience and will enable NewCo to invest in future technologies and networks.
Positioning Thailand as a regional technology hub.

The NewCo will operate:

Telecom services and the sale and distribution of mobile devices via subsidiaries dtac, TriNet, and TrueMove H — using the 700 MHz, 850 MHz (under agreement with NT), 900 MHz, 1800 MHz, 2100 MHz, and 2300 MHz (under agreement with NT) spectrum.
Broadband internet provider via TrueOnline.
Pay TV, digital TV, and content provider via TrueVisions.
Portfolio of digital services via True Digital Group, and new businesses through artificial intelligence, cloud technology, smart devices, smart cities, amongst others.
Venture capital investments, with the intention to raise VC funding of USD 100-200 million with partners to invest in promising digital startups.

The merged operator could provide more competition to AIS across all market segments, not only mobile. AIS Fiber, for instance, holds a 14% market share and differentiated its services with value added and bundling packages. NewCo would build on existing TrueOnline offering and could take a convergent offering to a new level, e.g. quadplay.

While we await the final decision on the merger, it is clear that dtac is falling behind its competitors when it comes to 5G performance. The recently announced National 5G Alliance aims to further promote the role of 5G in enabling digital transformation. We will monitor Thai operators’ performance and wait for the results for the upcoming mid-band spectrum auction to see whether this will close the performance gap. In the meantime, you can compare mobile performance across operators and countries using Speedtest Intelligence.

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.

Ookla Research™ Articles

Mark Giles | February 15, 2023

Are 5G Networks Meeting Consumers’ Expectations?

Key messages

In-market 5G performance varies widely. Reviewing the top 10% and worst 10% of Ookla® Speedtest Intelligence® samples reveals significant variance in the consumer experience on today’s 5G networks, with 5G speeds peaking at over 1 Gbps for the top 10% of users in the U.A.E on average, but falling to below 20 Mbps for the lower 10% in Norway, the U.S., Japan, Germany, and Spain.
Median 5G performance is declining in many early launch 5G markets. While understandable as 5G adoption grows and users in more remote locations access 5G, declining median download speeds also point to investment and deployment challenges in some markets. At the same time, many of these markets are facing economic headwinds, placing more emphasis than ever on cost control. As a result, operators must carefully balance network investment priorities.
5G Net Promoter Scores (NPS) significantly higher than 4G LTE in most markets, but waning. With the exception of Sweden and Qatar, all the early launch 5G markets in our analysis saw 5G NPS fall year-over-year. Operators’ 5G NPS still trade at a premium compared to 4G, and while performance is just one part of the equation, operators should take care to build on the positive sentiment that 5G has brought to date.

Despite impressive headline speeds, 5G performance varies a lot

Median 5G performance allows us to gauge the midpoint of user experience on 5G networks, however it doesn’t paint the full picture. While headline 5G speeds impress, Speedtest Intelligence data lays bare the ups and downs of 5G performance for consumers, even in early launch, advanced 5G markets. We recently looked at 5G network performance over high frequency (mmW) bands, painting a view of the true potential of 5G networks. However, if we look at performance on today’s 5G networks, looking beyond the median at the range of performance between users in the top 10% and those in the lower 10%, Speedtest Intelligence data reveals huge variance in the performance users experience.

The U.A.E. was the fastest 5G market in our analysis, based on median download performance of 545.53 Mbps in December 2022, followed by South Korea and Qatar. However, the top 10% of users in the U.A.E. recorded speeds of at least 1,266.49 Mbps on average, while the lowest 10% of users experienced speeds of 127.52 Mbps or slower on average. At the other end of the scale, Spain recorded a median 5G speed of 94.14 Mbps, but also demonstrated wide variance between the top 10% of samples at 537.95 Mbps or faster and the lowest 10% with 10.67 Mbps or less.

Based on many of the marketing messages around 5G, consumers are led to expect a big bang change in performance. However, with 5G operating over a greater range of spectrum bands than previous generations, including high frequency spectrum which has relatively poorer propagation, it’s understandable that 5G performance will vary more than previous generations of mobile network technology.

5G markets set to face performance challenges during 2023

While globally 5G speeds have remained stable, for many of the markets in our analysis, median 5G download speeds have fallen over the past year. The U.S. was the main outlier, recording the strongest uplift in 5G performance as T-Mobile continued to drive home its performance advantage in the market, while Verizon’s performance improved early in 2022 through its deployment of 5G in C-band spectrum. This trend is likely to continue in 2023 in the U.S., as more C-band spectrum is made available. However, the picture remains concerning for a number of other 5G markets, particularly those where median 5G speeds are at the lower end of the spectrum.

In some markets, 5G was initially priced at a premium to 4G, with operators focused on driving incremental returns on the new network technology. However, operators have been increasingly opening up 5G access by removing incremental costs for consumers and adding prepaid plans too. As 5G adoption scales, it places more strain on the new networks. The challenge for many of these markets is that network performance is likely to degrade further unless network densification picks up.

For network operators, this investment imperative is occuring amidst macroeconomic headwinds, which are driving up operating costs and putting pressure on consumer and enterprise spend. In addition, there remain challenges in deploying additional 5G cell sites in dense urban areas where demand is strongest, while in some markets EMF limits and other regulations can limit the deployment of high-capacity 5G sites.

Degrading 5G performance impacts consumer sentiment

Net Promoter Score (NPS) from Speedtest Intelligence paints a largely positive picture of current 5G networks. NPS is a key performance indicator of customer experience, categorizing users into Detractors (score 0-6), Passives (score 7-8), and Promoters (score 9-10), with the NPS representing the percentage of Promoters minus the percent of Detractors, displayed in the range from -100 to 100. Across the markets we analyzed, 5G users on average rated their network operator with NPS scores that were universally higher than those for 4G LTE users. However, consumer sentiment for users on 5G networks is beginning to shift, with NPS scores falling, coinciding with lower median 5G performance in many of the markets we analyzed.

Declining performance levels will be a factor driving NPS down for some 5G users. It’s also important to remember that as 5G scales in many of these early launch markets, the profile of 5G users is also changing from predominantly urban-based users, to more of a mix of urban, suburban, and rural users, which brings additional coverage and performance challenges for network operators. We plan to examine the relationship between 5G performance and spectrum in an up-coming content piece. Please get in touch if you’d like to learn more about Speedtest Intelligence data.

About the author

Mark Giles

Mark Giles heads up Ookla Research™, leading a team of expert analysts in transforming the world's largest repository of network performance data into authoritative insights. Mark is passionate about using data to illuminate the state of global connectivity, in order to advocate for a better, more accessible internet for all.

Linkedin /mark-d-giles

Fibre Is Not Enough: Wi-Fi CPE, Interconnection, and Satellite in the Broadband Quality Equation

Accenture to Acquire Ookla to Strengthen Network Intelligence and Experience with Data and AI For Enterprises

Fast fiber, slow Wi-Fi: the router bottleneck in the Gulf region

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Ookla’s Speedtest® data indicates that a router’s suboptimal placement can negatively impact in-home Wi-Fi.

Key Takeaways:

In-home Wi-Fi throughput is directly correlated with signal strength

How Wi-Fi standards can alter the RSSI-speed equation

How does the spectrum band impact Wi-Fi’s reach and performance

Practical solutions address last-mile bottlenecks in the Gulf region

Optimize CPE placement to bridge the gap between provisioned speed and realized performance

About the author

Loaded Latency and L4S: The Next Frontier for Network Performance

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Key Takeaways

Why Loaded Latency Defines Real-World Experience

How L4S Keeps Latency Low Under Load

Why Operators Are Prioritizing Low-Latency Architectures

The Application Ecosystem Is Moving Toward Stable Low Latency

The Future of Low-Latency Networking

About the author

World Cup 2026: The Connectivity Picture for Traveling Fans

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Why Don’t All Fans Get the Same Signal at World Cup 2026?

What to Expect in Each Host Country at World Cup 2026

eSIMs and World Cup 2026: What Travelers Should Know

How Should Fans Prepare for Roaming at World Cup 2026?

The Bottom Line on Roaming at World Cup 2026

About the author

Ookla Partners with Arcep to Bring Speedtest Data to Mon Réseau Mobile Mapping Platform

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

About the author

Rethinking Indoor Connectivity: Why It Matters More Than Ever

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

The Data Gap: What Regulators Miss About Indoor Coverage

Why Indoor Coverage is a Public Safety Issue

New Models for Indoor Connectivity: The Rise of Shared Infrastructure

The Building Owner Equation: What’s the ROI?

Policy Can Make or Break Progress

How Ookla Is Helping Improve Indoor Connectivity

Looking Ahead: Closing the Indoor Coverage Gap

About the author

How Globe Uses Ookla Data to Deliver the Most Consistent Mobile Experience in the Philippines [Case Study]

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Situation

Download the full case study

About the author

Rated #1: How DITO Grew its Brand with Speedtest Awards™ [Case Study]

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Situation

Download the full case study

About the author

Speed Plus Experience: How Speedtest’s New Awards Capture What Really Matters to Users

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Why Speed Still Matters

A More Holistic View: Speedtest Connectivity Score™

The Ookla Difference: Measuring What Matters Most

Introducing New Speedtest Awards™: Recognizing True Performance

Tying It All Together: Speed and QoE for a Complete Picture of Performance

About the author

Dtac and True Merger Talks Point to a Need to Address Unequal Footing in Thailand's 5G

Get the latest Ookla Research™

Share

Key takeaways

Thailand’s 5G performs well compared to its regional counterparts

AIS wins on 5G performance in Thailand, TrueMove H on 5G Availability

Songkhla tops the charts for median 5G download speed

Bangkok has the highest 5G Availability

4G Availability close enough, AIS in the lead for 4G speeds

Consolidation wave across Asia-Pacific could stifle competition

The shape of the Thai mobile market

If approved, M&A would bring more MVNOs to the market