U.S. Broadband Competition Index 2026

Understanding the HHI: How We Measure Competition

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is the standard measure of market concentration used by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to evaluate competitive conditions. It is calculated by summing the squares of each firm's market share percentage within a defined market.

For broadband, we calculate HHI at the metro area (CBSA) level using each provider's address-level coverage percentage from FCC Broadband Data Collection records. The thresholds, established in the DOJ/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines, are:

• HHI below 1,500: Competitive market — multiple providers with meaningful market share
• HHI 1,500–2,500: Moderately concentrated — a few providers dominate but competition exists
• HHI above 2,500: Highly concentrated — monopoly or near-monopoly conditions

For context, a market with four equal-sized providers has an HHI of 2,500. A market where a single provider controls 70% and a second controls 30% has an HHI of 5,800. Most broadband markets fall somewhere in between.

Source: DOJ/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines, 2023

National HHI Distribution

Of the approximately 200 metro areas analyzed, the majority fall into the “highly concentrated” category. The national average HHI for wired broadband is 3,180, which itself exceeds the monopoly threshold.

This means that nearly 6 in 10 U.S. metro areas have broadband markets concentrated enough to meet the DOJ's standard for regulatory scrutiny in a merger review. For consumers in these markets, the lack of competition translates directly into higher prices, slower speeds, and less infrastructure investment.

Source: InternetProviders.ai analysis of FCC BDC data, March 2026

10 Most Competitive Broadband Markets

These metro areas have the lowest HHI scores in the nation, driven by the presence of fiber overbuilders (Google Fiber, UTOPIA, municipal networks) competing alongside cable incumbents. Consumers in these markets benefit from lower prices, faster speeds, and more plan options.

A common thread: every market in the top 10 has at least one fiber overbuilder that entered the market and forced incumbent cable providers to compete on price and speed. Google Fiber's entry into Kansas City in 2012 remains the most cited example of how a single new entrant can transform an entire metro area's broadband landscape.

10 Least Competitive Broadband Markets

These metro areas have the highest HHI scores, with a single cable provider controlling the vast majority of the wired broadband market. Consumers in these markets typically have no meaningful alternative beyond satellite or limited fixed wireless service.

BEAD funding targets many of these underserved markets. If the program delivers as designed, these areas should see meaningful competition improvements by 2028–2029 as new fiber networks come online. See our BEAD Funding Tracker for state-by-state deployment timelines.

How Competition Affects Price and Speed

The data shows a clear, consistent relationship between the number of broadband providers in a market and the prices consumers pay. Markets with more competition deliver lower prices per megabit and significantly faster median speeds.

The price-per-100-Mbps metric is particularly telling: consumers in monopoly markets pay $52 per 100 Mbps, while those in competitive markets with 4+ providers pay just $11 — a 79% reduction. This difference adds up to roughly $276 per year for a typical household consuming 300 Mbps of service.

These findings align with FCC research showing that broadband prices decline most rapidly in markets where new fiber entrants compete directly with cable incumbents. The mechanism is straightforward: when consumers have alternatives, providers must compete on price and quality to retain subscribers.

Fiber Availability and Market Competition

Fiber availability is the single strongest predictor of broadband market competition. Metro areas where fiber reaches 50% or more of addresses have an average HHI of 2,100, compared to 3,800 in markets below 30% fiber penetration.

This correlation reflects a structural dynamic: fiber deployment introduces a new competitor to markets previously dominated by a single cable provider. In many U.S. markets, the legacy broadband landscape consists of one cable provider (Xfinity, Spectrum, or Cox) and one DSL provider (AT&T, Frontier, or CenturyLink) that cannot meet the 100/20 Mbps benchmark. When AT&T upgrades from DSL to fiber, or when a new entrant like Google Fiber builds a parallel network, the market shifts from an effective monopoly to a competitive duopoly or triopoly.

This is why fiber investment — whether through private capital, BEAD funding, or municipal networks — has such a large impact on consumer welfare. Fiber does not just deliver faster speeds; it restructures the competitive dynamics of the entire market. See our fiber provider guide for detailed comparisons.

Rural vs. Urban Competition Gap

The competition gap between rural and urban America mirrors the coverage gap documented in our Broadband Access Report. Rural metro areas (CBSAs with populations under 100,000) are 3.2 times more likely to score above the DOJ's monopoly threshold (HHI > 2,500) than urban metro areas.

• Urban CBSAs (pop. 500K+): Average HHI of 2,450, with 3.8 providers per address
• Suburban CBSAs (pop. 100K-500K): Average HHI of 3,100, with 2.6 providers per address
• Rural CBSAs (pop. <100K): Average HHI of 4,200, with 1.6 providers per address

The economic reality is stark: deploying competing broadband networks in a market of 10,000 addresses is commercially viable; deploying them in a market of 2,000 spread across 500 square miles often is not. This is precisely the market failure that the BEAD program is designed to address, though even BEAD-funded networks will typically produce a duopoly rather than a fully competitive market in rural areas.

Frequently Asked Questions

Methodology

HHI calculations are based on InternetProviders.ai's analysis of provider-level coverage data from the FCC Broadband Data Collection. For each CBSA (Core Based Statistical Area), we calculate each wired broadband provider's coverage share as a percentage of total served addresses, then compute HHI using the standard formula: HHI = sum of (market share)² for all providers.

Provider counts represent distinct wired and fixed wireless ISPs reporting service at 100/20 Mbps or faster. Satellite providers are excluded. Average prices are derived from plan data collected across provider websites and verified against FCC Urban Rate Survey submissions.

Full methodology details are available on our methodology page. Data is available under CC BY 4.0 for researchers, journalists, and policymakers.

Source: InternetProviders.ai Methodology

Related Reports

• 2026 U.S. Broadband Access Report
• America's Internet Report Card 2026
• Hidden Fees Report 2026
• BEAD Funding Tracker
• Broadband Pricing Transparency Report 2026