The UK’s telecoms market has been ranked 33rd out of 34 countries for overall sector health, a new report has revealed.
According to Kearney’s 2026 Global Telecom Health Index, the UK ranks second from bottom, with the report highlighting weaknesses across customer sentiment, technology deployment and commercial performance.
Kearney assessed 34 countries using 20 measures covering areas including financial performance, network quality, market structure, commercial strength and customer satisfaction.
As a result, the UK came 28th for customer sentiment and also sits in the bottom half for technology deployment and commercial ability.
The research also suggests there is a link between market structure and investment.
This comes as of the 34 countries assessed, the 24 markets with three mobile operators or fewer scored higher across every area of the index except customer sentiment, where they performed equally.
The same pattern can be seen in fixed broadband. More concentrated markets recorded higher fibre coverage and fibre take-up.
However, that does not necessarily mean fewer operators automatically result in a better market. But, it does suggest that scale can give operators greater capacity to invest in networks and infrastructure.
Could consolidation be the answer?
For Rajiv Datta, CEO of Nexfibre, the UK’s current structure remains a significant problem.
He says: “The UK’s telecoms market is fragmented and fragile. To deliver greater choice and quality for consumers and businesses alike, it requires a scaled financially secure, wholesale challenger. Consolidation will be crucial as the route to sustainable competition and a healthier sector,” he says
“The UK now has an opportunity to move beyond fragmentation and build a competitive, resilient fibre market that can support the country’s digital and economic ambitions for generations to come.”
However, Steve Cray, Managing Director of Cellnex UK, argues that the UK also needs to rethink how it measures and delivers mobile connectivity.
“The UK’s position in these rankings reflects a mobile network architecture and policy environment that has historically prioritised broad geographic coverage, rather than network capacity and user experience,” he explains.
“While more than 96% of the UK landmass can access a 4G signal, coverage alone is no longer the best measure of performance. In many locations, networks can struggle to meet the growing demands placed on them by consumers and businesses.”
What can the UK learn from Europe?
According to Cray, many European countries have achieved “significantly higher levels of network densification than the UK and, as a result, are delivering stronger mobile network performance for consumers and businesses.
According to him, stronger performance in those markets is the result of deliberate policy choices rather than chance.
“This has not happened by accident. The most successful markets have combined clear and publicly stated national ambitions for network quality with telecommunications policies and regulatory frameworks that both encourage and reward investment,” he says.
“They have also given consumers greater visibility of real-world network performance, enabling purchasing decisions to be based on quality and value, not just price.”
“The UK is not short of ambition or technology. Both already exist and are proven elsewhere in Europe. What is missing is the coordinated execution that healthier markets have managed, turning shared goals into shared, efficient deployment on the ground.”
Can better regulation improve the market?
Kearney’s findings also highlight a wider problem facing European telecoms operators, with falling revenues, returns and a significant investment gap putting pressure on the sector.
However, improving the market will require action from operators, regulators and government, not just the industry.
Cray explains: “Improving mobile connectivity in the UK requires action across the entire ecosystem. Mobile operators have a strong aspiration to deliver better network quality, while neutral host infrastructure providers have access to the long-term capital needed to invest in the shared infrastructure required for the associated large-scale network densification.”
Steve Leighton, Chair of ISPA, argues: “Two things will determine what comes next. The first is regulatory stability. The final stages of rollout are the hardest and the most expensive, and investors need confidence that the framework will not shift underneath them.
“Consistent, proportionate regulation is what will get the UK to nationwide gigabit coverage by 2032.
“The second is take-up. A sustained, coordinated effort on digital inclusion, consumer awareness and a managed migration away from legacy copper is essential to continue converting the investment already made into the huge productivity and growth benefits that gigabit connectivity is capable of,” he concludes.
IN RELATED NEWS
