FTTP adoption rates and market value in Europe – 2024 update
- Jolanta Stanke
- Sep 3
- 8 min read
This is our latest update on FTTP adoption rates across Europe and how they changed between 2013 and 2024[1]. We have developed a model which can be used to calculate current and potential FTTP broadband subscription revenues that can be generated in a country – the revenue headroom – depending on fibre adoption rates and consumer split by tariff tiers (low, medium, high). In this instance we are focusing on residential broadband services. The model can be extended to the global scale as well as adapted to other technologies and services (for example, business broadband, pay TV) and different time scales.
In addition to FTTP, our dataset also contains data on xDSL and cable broadband subscriptions, market shares, homes passed and adoption rates in each of the 30 European countries (EU members, UK, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland).
This research uses data from two of our datasets – broadband subscriber figures and broadband tariffs (see our European Broadband Statistics product) - as well as other inputs such as Broadband Coverage in Europe (BCE) studies which Point Topic co-authored for the European Commission.
[1] For brevity, we will be using FTTP and ‘fibre’ interchangeably to denote FTTP/H/B variants.
FTTP adoption rates across Europe: current state and trends
By fibre adoption rate we mean the ratio of the number of fibre broadband subscribers and the number of homes passed by fibre networks in a country.
As of end-2024, fibre adoption rates ranged from 19.6% in Austria to 97.7% in Iceland, with the average among the 30 European countries standing at 60.1%, up from 57.8% at end-2023.
The map below suggests that fibre adoption rates are at the higher end of the spectrum where FTTP deployment started earlier compared to other markets, and where investment and competition were encouraged (Scandinavia, France, Portugal, Spain). Some Central and Eastern European countries at the outset focused on full fibre instead of partial solutions such as VDSL, and as a result also have high FTTP adoption rates (the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia), even though they do have some VDSL infrastructure.
On the other hand, the incumbents in Austria, Greece, Germany, Italy, Belgium and Croatia, among others, favoured VDSL for significant periods of time, before shifting investment to full fibre. In these countries, FTTP infrastructure was mainly deployed by smaller operators, and nationwide full fibre coverage only started increasing in recent years. As a result, they have relatively low fibre adoption rates (Figure 2a).
In terms of fibre deployment, several countries with relatively low FTTP adoption rates made significant progress lately, which is reflected in high FTTP coverage at the end of 2024 for the likes of Italy, Croatia, Hungary and the Netherlands, among others (Figure 2b). On the other hand, Czechia, Switzerland and Latvia are bucking the trend, with their FTTP coverage being relatively low but fibre adoption rates being higher than in some countries with much better network coverage.
Of course, the extent of FTTP coverage and the length of time fibre networks have been in operation are not the only factors influencing fibre adoption rates. We will touch upon other factors in the next section.
Between 2023 and 2024, we saw the largest positive change in the FTTP adoption rate in Spain, where it went up from 84.4% to 92.8% (+8.4%) (Figure 3). While the number of FTTP homes passed increased by only 1%, the country saw a 11.1% increase in fibre broadband subscribers y-o-y. They accounted for the lion’s share of the overall broadband subscriber growth, and of the total fixed broadband subscribers, while xDSL market share decreased to almost zero (0.5%) and cable based broadband connections fell to 7%. Greece, Romania and Malta also added almost 7% to their FTTP adoption rates.
Between 2023 and 2024, fibre adoption rates fell in nine countries. The largest drop was in Finland (from 72.4% to 68.6%). It is not uncommon to see negative growth in fibre adoption where fibre networks are built faster than new customers sign up. This is especially common in mature broadband markets where most households are either already on fibre or have other broadband services, sometimes provided over mobile networks. Even so, fibre adoption in Finland remains higher than the EU average of 60.1%.
The largest discrepancy in the growth of FTTP homes passed and FTTP subscribers was in Greece (17.9% and 59.2% respectively) (Figure 4). In this country, investment in FTTP deployment is relatively slow, not least due to the large number of archaeologically significant sites. At the same time, subscriber growth is dynamic as it is coming from a low base. Nevertheless, there is still plenty of potential for fibre adoption growth, with the current rate among the lowest in Europe, at 26.3%.
Malta, Belgium and the UK were the other countries with high annual growth in FTTP subscribers (41.5%, 40.5% and 38.4%). These countries focused on full fibre later than their European counterparts, so they are still deploying the infrastructure and are at the top of the league in terms of the growth in FTTP homes passed, but they still have to catch up with the leaders when it comes to fibre adoption rates. In terms of the network rollouts, as of end-2024 Malta and the UK were approaching nearly universal fibre network coverage (94% and 73% respectively), while Belgium had the lowest FTTP coverage in Europe at 34%.
What factors limit FTTP adoption?
There are a number of factors slowing down migration from other broadband technologies to full fibre, including:
the tendency of consumers to stay with the status quo;
the lack of perceived reward - cable or VDSL broadband is considered ‘good enough’ by many households, especially with Docsis 3.1 enabling gigabit speeds and some variants of VDSL able to provide 100Mbps or more;
the FTTP upgrade process which requires an engineer visit, installation work at the property and sometimes even some digging.
In addition, the migration potential from copper to fibre varies significantly across markets. By migration potential we mean broadband households using xDSL (ADSL or VDSL) services. In theory, they could all upgrade to FTTP as long as there are enough FTTP lines available in the areas where they live. This in turn depends on the number of homes passed by FTTP networks.
In nine of the 30 European countries covered in this analysis, there are more subscribers still using xDSL broadband than FTTP lines available (we call the latter ‘FTTP headroom’, i.e. the number of homes passed by FTTP minus already existing FTTP subscribers) (Figure 5). This number has gone down from 12 countries a year earlier, with Italy, Slovakia and Latvia extending their fibre networks to create some FTTP headroom.
In Iceland and France, the ratio of xDSL subscribers to FTTP lines available is around 3 to 1. In Greece, Switzerland and Germany these ratios are more than 2 to 1, though they have gone down in 12 months. Still, in these countries, the number of FTTP lines available are way below the number of households still on xDSL broadband.
Even so, Greece and Germany still have plenty of FTTP headroom as fibre adoption rates in these countries are 26.3% and 31.1% respectively. So, there seems to be limited appetite for full fibre among consumers in these markets for the moment. However, Swiss operators are approaching saturation, with a 66.7% FTTP adoption rate, while Iceland and France are nearly at full capacity with 97.7% and 91.9% adoption rates.
In contrast, in Romania and Norway, xDSL subscribers constitute only 2% and 3% of the FTTP headroom, so the majority of the remaining FTTP lines would have to be sold to households using other broadband technologies or those without any broadband. Having said that, not all households are interested in using fibre broadband services or any fixed broadband, for that matter. FTTP providers increasingly offer value added services such as advanced Wi-Fi or TV and video streaming packages to attract customers from rival ISPs and platforms.
FTTP broadband revenue: current and potential
FTTP adoption rates can be used to estimate and benchmark current and potential additional revenue (headroom) from fibre broadband services.
Our FTTP revenue model described below is using a hypothetical split of fibre broadband subscribers by tiers of tariffs they subscribe to. The calculations are based on Point Topic’s tariff and subscriber data as of end-2024. All tariffs used in this model are at USD$ PPP rates. The maximum available revenue would come from 100% of FTTP homes passed subscribing to an FTTP service.
In this example we set the tariff tier split as follows:
We assume that 10% of residential broadband subscribers take the most expensive FTTP services, with 20% taking the mid-price ones and 70% going for the lowest monthly subscriptions. (The tariff tier splits will vary between different countries and operators, and the model gives users the flexibility to adjust the tier splits depending on each particular case.)
In this example we compare the two selected countries – France and Germany.
With the tariff tiers set as above, French operators would be generating more than seven times higher revenue from residential FTTP broadband services at almost $1.3bn (PPP) compared to $179m (PPP) earned by the German providers. This is the case because in 2024 France had a much higher number of FTTP subscribers, and the average FTTP ARPU in this country was $52.49 PPP, compared to $33.70 PPP in Germany.
On the other hand, the potential additional revenue that could be generated from such services if 100% fibre adoption were achieved is much higher in Germany - $396m (PPP) compared to $113m (PPP) in France. This is because FTTP headroom in terms of the number of available fibre lines in Germany was five times higher than that in France – with its lower FTTP adoption rate, Germany had much more potential FTTP subscribers who were yet to sign up on the existing networks (Figure 7).
If we assumed that more consumers were on lower tier tariffs, the current and potential revenue would of course be lower and vice versa.
The fibre broadband ARPU will depend on the tariff tier split. With the above FTTP tariff tier split, it varies from $24.48 PPP in Romania to $110.66 PPP in Norway (Figure 8). In the case of Norway, the tariffs include broadband plans with 5Gbps and 10Gbps download speeds, which come with a high price tag. Given that and the fact that Norway is a higher income country, this results in high ARPU.
Of course, the actual take-up of FTTP broadband services will likely be lower than 100% of households passed by FTTP networks. This model estimates the maximum revenue headroom possible.
We have made this model available to demonstrate how data from our different datasets can be combined to produce valuable insights. All 30 countries, different tariff tiers, and metrics can be compared using our analytical tool.
You can try the tool in the attached spreadsheet, containing a sample of countries.
To get access to the complete dataset, contact isabelle.anderson@point-topic.com
The dataset contains quarterly data between 2013 and 2024. It has the following fields:
FTTP subscribers
FTTP households passed
FTTP adoption rate
FTTP headroom
FTTP coverage, % of HHs
xDSL subscribers (migration potential)
xDSL subscribers as % of FTTP headroom
FTTP subscriber adds
xDSL subscriber adds
Total broadband subscribers
xDSL households passed
xDSL adoption rate
xDSL market share
Cable subscribers
Cable households passed
Cable adoption rate
Cable market share
FTTP Tariff (AVERAGE)
FTTP Tariff (MEDIAN)
FTTP Tariff (MAX)
FTTP Tariff (MIN)
FTTP subscriber revenue (based on selected tariff tiers)
FTTP revenue headroom (based on tariff tiers)
FTTP ARPU (based on tariff tiers)
FTTP subscriber revenue - AVERAGE
FTTP Revenue headroom - AVERAGE
FTTP subscriber revenue - MEDIAN
FTTP revenue headroom - MEDIAN
Comments