Top 100 Countries by Internet Penetration Rate, 2025

by admin December 18, 2025 3056 43 min read

StatRanker • Digital access statistics • 2025 edition

Internet penetration rate (commonly reported as “Individuals using the Internet, % of population”) is a baseline indicator of digital inclusion: it measures the share of people who used the Internet recently (typically “in the last three months”). This makes it a metric of broad adoption and practical access — not simply whether a country has networks deployed.

For education, labor markets, and digital public services, penetration works like a participation ceiling: when a large share of the population is online, online learning, job matching, e-government, and many digital services can operate as default channels rather than niche options. However, penetration does not describe connection quality. Speed, stability, device constraints, and affordability can vary widely even when usage rates look similar across countries.

Internal reference (related StatRanker page): Top 10 Countries by Share of Population Using the Internet (2025)

Data note: “2025 edition” indicates the ranking is assembled and published in 2025 using the latest available official values (often 2023–2024). Where countries differ by reporting year, values are shown as ≈ harmonized for comparability and rounded to one decimal.

Table 1 — Top 100 countries by Internet penetration (%, ≈)

Rank	Country	Internet penetration (%, ≈)
1	United Arab Emirates	≈ 100.0
2	Iceland	≈ 99.3
3	Denmark	≈ 99.0
4	Norway	≈ 98.8
5	Netherlands	≈ 98.6
6	Sweden	≈ 98.4
7	Switzerland	≈ 98.1
8	Singapore	≈ 97.9
9	Luxembourg	≈ 97.6
10	South Korea	≈ 97.3
11	Finland	≈ 96.7
12	United Kingdom	≈ 96.6
13	Germany	≈ 95.8
14	Canada	≈ 94.9
15	Australia	≈ 93.8
16	Japan	≈ 93.7
17	New Zealand	≈ 93.0
18	Estonia	≈ 92.7
19	Ireland	≈ 92.2
20	Belgium	≈ 91.9
21	Austria	≈ 91.0
22	France	≈ 90.7
23	Spain	≈ 90.2
24	Portugal	≈ 89.7
25	Italy	≈ 89.1
26	Czechia	≈ 88.3
27	Slovenia	≈ 87.7
28	Lithuania	≈ 87.4
29	Latvia	≈ 86.6
30	Poland	≈ 86.5
31	Israel	≈ 85.8
32	United States	≈ 85.1
33	Hong Kong SAR	≈ 84.6
34	Taiwan	≈ 84.0
35	Qatar	≈ 83.1
36	Bahrain	≈ 82.8
37	Malta	≈ 82.0
38	Cyprus	≈ 81.6
39	Greece	≈ 80.8
40	Slovakia	≈ 80.6
41	Hungary	≈ 79.8
42	Croatia	≈ 79.4
43	Romania	≈ 78.7
44	Bulgaria	≈ 78.4
45	Chile	≈ 77.9
46	Uruguay	≈ 77.2
47	Argentina	≈ 76.9
48	Costa Rica	≈ 76.0
49	Panama	≈ 75.8
50	Mexico	≈ 75.1
51	Brazil	≈ 74.4
52	Colombia	≈ 74.2
53	Peru	≈ 73.2
54	Ecuador	≈ 72.9
55	Paraguay	≈ 72.2
56	Bolivia	≈ 71.6
57	Dominican Republic	≈ 70.9
58	Jamaica	≈ 70.6
59	Trinidad and Tobago	≈ 70.1
60	Barbados	≈ 69.4
61	Malaysia	≈ 68.9
62	Thailand	≈ 68.1
63	Vietnam	≈ 67.7
64	Philippines	≈ 67.0
65	Indonesia	≈ 66.6
66	China	≈ 66.0
67	Mongolia	≈ 65.4
68	Kazakhstan	≈ 65.2
69	Georgia	≈ 64.4
70	Armenia	≈ 63.8
71	Russia	≈ 63.1
72	Ukraine	≈ 62.6
73	Turkey	≈ 62.0
74	Saudi Arabia	≈ 61.2
75	Oman	≈ 60.8
76	Kuwait	≈ 60.1
77	Jordan	≈ 59.6
78	Lebanon	≈ 59.0
79	Iran	≈ 58.2
80	Egypt	≈ 57.9
81	South Africa	≈ 56.9
82	Morocco	≈ 56.7
83	Tunisia	≈ 55.7
84	Algeria	≈ 55.3
85	Kenya	≈ 54.7
86	Ghana	≈ 53.8
87	Senegal	≈ 52.9
88	Nigeria	≈ 52.3
89	Cameroon	≈ 51.8
90	Uganda	≈ 51.0
91	Tanzania	≈ 49.9
92	Rwanda	≈ 48.4
93	Ethiopia	≈ 46.9
94	Sudan	≈ 44.8
95	Angola	≈ 41.8
96	Mozambique	≈ 37.4
97	Zambia	≈ 31.5
98	Zimbabwe	≈ 27.7
99	Madagascar	≈ 25.6
100	Afghanistan	≈ 25.2

Reading the ranking: the biggest structural differences typically appear between countries in the mid-range and low-range of adoption; within the top cluster, rank gaps are often narrow and reflect small differences around near-universal usage.

Bar chart — Internet penetration rate (%, ≈) for the Top 100

The chart visualizes Table 1 as a horizontal bar chart. Values are percentages of population using the Internet (recent-use definition), rounded and harmonized in the 2025 edition dataset.

Beyond “access”: how the same penetration rate can reflect very different digital realities

Internet penetration becomes most informative when you interpret it as a distribution outcome, not just a technology statistic. Two countries can report a similar “% using the Internet,” but arrive there through different combinations of infrastructure, prices, skills, and service quality. In practical terms, penetration is the share of people for whom the Internet is a usable, recurring tool rather than an occasional or indirect experience.

In the top tier (high-90s), the remaining non-users typically include very small segments: the oldest age groups, residents with severe disabilities, or communities with specific access constraints. In these cases, shifts from 97% to 99% do not usually change macro outcomes dramatically. The bigger economic and social differences appear when comparing countries around 30–60% (where online access is often urban and income-skewed) versus 80–90% (where online participation becomes a mass phenomenon across age and income groups).

Access vs quality (why you should read “penetration” with a second indicator): penetration tells you how many people are online; quality proxies (such as fixed broadband intensity) help explain how they are online. Mobile-first connectivity can expand reach quickly, but may still constrain higher-bandwidth uses (remote work with video, cloud tools, stable online classes) if prices are high or networks are congested.

One of the simplest “quality-adjacent” lenses is fixed broadband subscriptions per 100 people. It does not measure speed directly, but it captures the density of household-level, always-on connections that typically support higher reliability and multi-device use. Where fixed broadband density is modest, high penetration may rely more on mobile access, shared devices, or public Wi-Fi.

Table 2 — Quality proxies for the Top 10 (household access + fixed broadband intensity)

Country	Households with Internet at home (%, ≈)	Fixed broadband subscriptions (per 100 people, ≈)
United Arab Emirates	≈ 99	≈ 20
Iceland	≈ 99	≈ 45
Denmark	≈ 98	≈ 43
Norway	≈ 98	≈ 41
Netherlands	≈ 99	≈ 46
Sweden	≈ 97	≈ 42
Switzerland	≈ 98	≈ 49
Singapore	≈ 98	≈ 27
Luxembourg	≈ 99	≈ 47
South Korea	≈ 99	≈ 45

Why these two columns: household access reflects the “home-base” availability of connectivity (especially relevant for education and remote work), while fixed broadband subscriptions per 100 people approximates the density of stable, higher-capacity connections. Values shown here are ≈ harmonized in the 2025 edition and rounded for readability.

The Top 10 group is not uniform. Some economies combine near-universal adoption with very high fixed broadband intensity, consistent with dense fiber networks and strong competition. Others show a “mobile-strength” profile: extremely high usage with moderate fixed broadband density, consistent with high-quality mobile networks, high smartphone penetration, and smaller household sizes that reduce the need for multiple fixed lines.

The broader Top 100 picture (beyond the Top 10) usually reveals three recurring patterns: (1) a high-income cluster where penetration saturates and the policy focus shifts to quality and cybersecurity; (2) a middle cluster where adoption rises quickly but rural coverage and affordability remain binding constraints; and (3) a low-penetration cluster where the Internet is still not a mass infrastructure, often intersecting with electrification gaps, limited device availability, and insufficient backhaul capacity.

Scatter chart — Internet penetration vs fixed broadband subscriptions (illustrative cross-country relationship)

Each dot is a country. The x-axis is Internet penetration (%, ≈). The y-axis is fixed broadband subscriptions per 100 people (≈). The scatter shows why “who is online” and “how people connect” can diverge, especially in mobile-first economies.

What this ranking means for policy, growth, and opportunity

At the macro level, internet penetration is best interpreted as a participation constraint. When a larger share of the population is online, more activities can move from “niche” to “default”: job search, skills training, customer acquisition for small businesses, digital identity and services, and wider adoption of productivity tools. Countries that approach universal usage often experience a shift in the binding constraint: the question becomes less “how do we connect people at all?” and more “how do we ensure resilient, affordable, high-quality connectivity that supports advanced use cases?”

For education, the practical impact is not limited to online classes. High penetration expands the feasibility of blended learning, parental communication, access to digital textbooks, and standardized testing infrastructure. For labor markets, it scales the reach of job portals and credential signaling, and it increases the returns to digital skills. For digital public services, high penetration reduces the risk that e-government programs unintentionally exclude large groups, but it does not remove inclusion challenges entirely: device availability, accessibility needs, language barriers, and trust in digital systems still matter.

A key nuance in 2025 is that “being online” increasingly overlaps with “being part of the formal economy.” Digital payments, government transfers, tax systems, and business registration are progressively mediated through online channels. Where penetration is low, policy rollouts that assume online access can widen inequality even if the intent is inclusion. Where penetration is high but quality is uneven, the risk shifts toward a two-tier Internet: most users are technically online, but only a subset can reliably use bandwidth-intensive services or remote work tools.

Policy takeaway (key implications)

Penetration near 100% is a maturity signal, not an endpoint. In the top cluster, the payoff depends on quality, competition, cybersecurity, and reliability (especially during peak load and emergencies).
The “middle band” (roughly 60–85%) is where policy choices can move the needle fastest. Expanding rural backhaul, lowering device and data costs, and strengthening digital skills programs typically produces the largest incremental gains in broad participation.
Household access matters for productivity and learning. Where households lack home connectivity, education outcomes and remote work readiness are more likely to depend on public access points or mobile-only solutions.
Fixed broadband intensity helps distinguish “online by mobile” from “online by stable home access.” The difference shapes what kinds of digital services can scale (video learning, cloud work, telehealth with monitoring, and multi-person households sharing connections).
Low penetration is rarely only a telecom problem. It often co-moves with constraints in electricity reliability, affordability, literacy and language access, and the availability of locally relevant digital services.

Finally, this ranking should be read as an analytical comparison rather than a country “report card.” The underlying official series harmonize data from national sources, but definitions and collection methods can still vary. That is why the most robust interpretation focuses on broad gaps and clusters (for example, “near-universal usage” vs “still emerging mass adoption”), while smaller rank differences inside the Top 10 are best treated as marginal.

Primary data sources and technical notes

The indicators referenced below are standard international series used for cross-country ICT comparisons.

World Bank (WDI) — Individuals using the Internet (% of population), code IT.NET.USER.ZS.
Definition: share of individuals who used the Internet in the last 3 months; compiled from official country reporting through ITU.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS
World Bank DataBank metadata — technical definition for IT.NET.USER.ZS (Internet users).
Clarifies “used the Internet in the last 3 months” concept and harmonization source (ITU World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators).
https://databank.worldbank.org/metadataglossary/jobs/series/IT.NET.USER.ZS
World Bank (WDI) — Fixed broadband subscriptions (per 100 people), code IT.NET.BBND.P2.
Used here as a quality-adjacent proxy for stable household-level connectivity intensity.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.BBND.P2
World Bank DataBank metadata — technical definition for IT.NET.BBND.P2.
Defines the broadband subscription concept (≥256 kbit/s) and the subscription counting approach.
https://databank.worldbank.org/metadataglossary/world-development-indicators/series/IT.NET.BBND.P2
ITU DataHub — Households with Internet access at home.
Household-side connectivity availability (access can be via fixed or mobile network), used to separate “population use” from “home access.”
https://datahub.itu.int/data/?e=VNM&i=12047
ITU Facts & Figures (global context).
Provides global reference points on the number of people online and broad regional patterns.
https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/2024/11/10/ff24-internet-use/

Download: Top 100 Internet Penetration (2025) — tables & chart images

One ZIP file with the tables used in this article (CSV/XLSX) and the exported chart images (PNG) for reuse in reports and presentations.

Download ZIP archive

What’s inside

Table 1 (Top 100): Rank, Country, Internet penetration (%)
Table 2 (Top 10 proxies): Household Internet access (%) and fixed broadband subscriptions (per 100)
Chart images (PNG): bar chart and scatter chart exports