market analysis · 2026
Wasted Bandwidth in Swedish BRFs
Quantifying how much of the fibre a housing cooperative pays for never reaches the apartment — and which buildings should act first.
A quantification of how much purchased broadband capacity never reaches household devices, based on router generation distribution, subscription speeds and measured WiFi throughput in concrete apartment buildings.
February 2026, revised August 2026 · Based on PTS Svensk telekommarknad 2024, router specifications and published WiFi performance measurements.
Executive summary
This report combines three datasets — the router generation distribution from the companion stock-and-flow model, PTS subscription statistics and published WiFi throughput measurements — to calculate how much purchased broadband capacity actually reaches household wireless devices.
The average BRF household subscribes to 378 Mbps but receives only 206 Mbps over WiFi — a loss of 45.5%. Half of all households (49.8%) have a router that is the primary performance bottleneck. The problem is most acute for gigabit subscribers with older routers: a household paying for 1,000/1,000 Mbps and using a WiFi 5 router typically receives only 225 Mbps to its devices.
| Metric | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Avg. subscription | 378 Mbps | Weighted average, 1.1M households |
| Avg. WiFi delivery | 206 Mbps | Typical apartment, 1–2 walls |
| Avg. loss | 45.5% | 172 Mbps per household |
| Bottlenecked | 49.8% | ≈ 548,000 households |
Key finding: Of every gigabit purchased by Swedish housing cooperatives, only 545 megabits on average reach the residents’ devices. The bottleneck is almost never the fibre network — it is the WiFi router the ISP delivered 3–7 years ago. For analysis of why this gap has measurable real-world consequences, see the companion report Why Bandwidth and Modern WiFi Matter.
| Subscription | WiFi 4 | WiFi 5 | WiFi 6 | WiFi 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100/100 | 55% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 250/250 | 82% | 10% | 0% | 0% |
| 500/500 | 91% | 55% | 20% | 0% |
| 1000/1000 | 96% | 78% | 60% | 25% |
| Router generation | Average bandwidth loss |
|---|---|
| WiFi 4 | 88.1% |
| WiFi 5 | 53.0% |
| WiFi 6 | 35.4% |
| WiFi 7 | 13.2% |
Figure 1: Average bandwidth waste per router generation, weighted across all subscription tiers.
The three input datasets
1. Router generation distribution (stock-and-flow model)
From the companion report WiFi Router Generations in Swedish Housing Cooperatives: WiFi 4 accounts for 9.2% of the installed base, WiFi 5 for 38.1%, WiFi 6 for 46.0% and WiFi 7 for 6.7%. Total population: 1.1 million households with group-connected broadband.
2. Subscription speeds in the BRF segment
PTS reports that 95% of all fixed broadband subscriptions in Sweden exceed 100 Mbps, and roughly half are at 250 Mbps or above. The single most common speed tier is 100/100 Mbps symmetric (36% of all fibre subscriptions). Gigabit subscriptions were the fastest-growing speed category in 2024 and now represent just over 11% of all broadband subscriptions. The BRF segment has a distinct profile driven by three factors: cost-conscious boards that often stay on 100/100, Bahnhof’s aggressive 1 Gbps offerings for housing cooperatives (from SEK 39/month), and Telenor’s default 250/250 for group contracts.
| Speed tier | Share (est. BRF) | Households |
|---|---|---|
| 100/100 Mbps | 38% | 418,000 |
| 250/250 Mbps | 28% | 308,000 |
| 500/500 Mbps | 14% | 154,000 |
| 1,000/1,000 Mbps | 20% | 220,000 |
- 100/100
- 250/250
- 500/500
- 1000/1000
Figure 2: Estimated distribution of BRF households across subscription speed tiers.
3. Real-world WiFi throughput by router generation
The table below shows estimated single-client throughput in a typical Swedish BRF apartment (67 m², 5 GHz with band steering, 1–2 non-load-bearing interior walls). Figures are based on published benchmarks of the actual router models deployed by Swedish ISPs, adjusted for apartment conditions with concrete framing.
| WiFi gen. | Typical ISP models | MIMO / class | Real-world throughput |
|---|---|---|---|
| WiFi 4 | Inteno EG500, FG500 | 2×2, N300, 2.4 GHz only | 30–60 Mbps |
| WiFi 5 | Technicolor TG389ac, Sagemcom F@st 5370e | 2×2–4×4, AC1200–2600 (2×2 client) | 150–300 Mbps |
| WiFi 6 | Icotera i4882, Technicolor F1, Zyxel EX3600 | 4×4, AX1800–9800 (2×2 client) | 300–500 Mbps |
| WiFi 7 | ASUS ZenWiFi BD4/BT8, Zyxel EE3301 | 2×2–3×3, BE3600–14000 | 600–1,000 Mbps |
The WiFi 4 routers ISPs deployed in this segment — such as the Inteno EG500/FG500 — are 2.4 GHz-only (the 802.11n standard itself supports both bands, but these entry-level gateways ship single-band), where interference in apartment buildings typically caps throughput at 30–60 Mbps. WiFi 5 throughput is limited in practice by the fact that nearly all client devices (phones, laptops) use 2×2 MIMO, so a 3×3 or 4×4 router delivers no higher speed to an individual device.
Bandwidth waste matrix
The matrix shows the percentage of subscribed speed lost to the WiFi bottleneck for each combination of speed tier and router generation. A dash (—) indicates that the router’s WiFi capacity exceeds the subscription speed and is therefore not a bottleneck.
| Subscription | WiFi 4 (45 Mbps) | WiFi 5 (225 Mbps) | WiFi 6 (400 Mbps) | WiFi 7 (750 Mbps) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100/100 | 55% | — | — | — |
| 250/250 | 82% | 10% | — | — |
| 500/500 | 91% | 55% | 20% | — |
| 1,000/1,000 | 96% | 78% | 60% | 25% |
The most critical cells are the large populations: WiFi 5 + 250 Mbps (approximately 117,000 households, 10% loss) and WiFi 5 + 1 Gbps (approximately 84,000 households, 78% loss). The latter scenario — a BRF that recently upgraded to Bahnhof’s 1 Gbps but still has Technicolor routers from the previous provider — is particularly problematic: the household pays for gigabit fibre but receives only a quarter of the capacity.
Impact by router generation
| Router generation | Households | Avg. subscribed | Avg. WiFi delivered | Bandwidth loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WiFi 4 | 101,200 | 378 Mbps | 45 Mbps | 88% |
| WiFi 5 | 419,100 | 378 Mbps | 178 Mbps | 53% |
| WiFi 6 | 506,000 | 378 Mbps | 244 Mbps | 35% |
| WiFi 7 | 73,700 | 378 Mbps | 328 Mbps | 13% |
- Subscribed
- WiFi delivered
Figure 3: Average subscribed speed versus WiFi speed actually delivered, by router generation.
Impact by subscription tier
| Subscription | Households | Avg. WiFi delivered | Bandwidth loss |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100/100 Mbps | 418,000 | 95 Mbps | 5% |
| 250/250 Mbps | 308,000 | 222 Mbps | 11% |
| 500/500 Mbps | 154,000 | 307 Mbps | 39% |
| 1,000/1,000 Mbps | 220,000 | 324 Mbps | 68% |
Figure 4: Bandwidth loss to the WiFi bottleneck by subscription tier.
The pattern is clear: the higher the subscription speed, the more bandwidth is lost to the WiFi bottleneck. Households on 100/100 are essentially unaffected (only WiFi 4 households experience measurable loss), while gigabit subscribers on average receive only a third of their purchased capacity wirelessly.
The upload side: symmetric fibre, asymmetric WiFi
Swedish BRF fibre connections are symmetric — a 250/250 subscription provides 250 Mbps in both directions. This is a significant advantage over cable or xDSL networks. However, WiFi throughput is typically 20–40% lower on upload than download, because most ISP routers allocate less airtime to upstream traffic and WiFi 5 lacks OFDMA for uplink scheduling entirely.
This matters most for the growing category of upload-dependent applications: video conferencing (Teams/Zoom at 2–4 Mbps per call), cloud backup (continuous 2–10 Mbps), security camera uploads (2–4 Mbps per camera), and content creation workflows. A household with two simultaneous video calls, one security camera, and an iCloud photo sync running in the background needs approximately 12–18 Mbps of sustained upload. WiFi 5 can deliver this comfortably in isolation, but under congestion — with 10+ devices contending for airtime — upload latency spikes to 30–50 ms and throughput becomes unstable, degrading call quality noticeably.
WiFi 6’s OFDMA scheduling and WiFi 7’s MLO provide the most significant improvements on the upload side, since they allow the router to allocate small, guaranteed uplink slots to latency-sensitive traffic even while other devices are transferring bulk data.
Who should act first: priority matrix
Not all BRFs face equal urgency. The matrix below ranks the most impactful upgrade paths by combining the population size of each segment with the severity of the bandwidth gap. The “upgrade cost” column reflects estimated per-household equipment cost for the most natural next step.
| Current situation | Households | Bandwidth loss | Upgrade path | Est. cost/household | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WiFi 5 + 1 Gbps | 84,000 | 78% | WiFi 7 router | 900–2,000 SEK | High |
| WiFi 4 (any speed) | 101,200 | 88% | WiFi 7 router | 900–2,000 SEK | High |
| WiFi 5 + 500 Mbps | 59,000 | 55% | WiFi 7 router | 900–2,000 SEK | High |
| WiFi 6 + 1 Gbps | 101,200 | 60% | WiFi 7 router | 900–2,000 SEK | Medium |
| WiFi 5 + 250 Mbps | 117,000 | 10% | WiFi 7 router | 900–2,000 SEK | Medium |
| WiFi 6 + 500 Mbps | 70,800 | 20% | WiFi 7 (future-proof) | 900–2,000 SEK | Lower |
| Any + 100/100 | 418,000 | 5% | Speed + WiFi 7 together | 900–2,000 SEK + contract | Lower |
Why WiFi 7, not WiFi 6. A few years ago the natural upgrade was a WiFi 6 router. That has changed. Sweden’s major ISPs — Bahnhof, Telia, Telenor — now ship WiFi 7 on new group contracts, and WiFi 6 has become the outgoing generation, increasingly hard to buy new. For a one-time purchase a BRF keeps for five or more years, choosing the second-latest generation is a false economy: the price gap to WiFi 7 is small, and WiFi 7’s 6 GHz band, wider channels and Multi-Link Operation buy the building years of extra headroom before the next refresh. A board that installs WiFi 7 today is buying one upgrade cycle instead of two.
The WiFi 6 segment is the one to convert. Households already on WiFi 6 are not in crisis — on a 250 Mbps line the loss is small. But WiFi 6 is now a generation behind the hardware being sold, and on the gigabit lines these buildings increasingly move to, even a WiFi 6 router leaves roughly 60% of the capacity on the table. This is the segment where “it works” quietly hides a widening gap. The natural moment to move them to WiFi 7 is the next contract renewal or router refresh — not a forced early replacement, but the default choice when the moment comes.
The highest-impact action for most BRFs is replacing WiFi 5 and older routers in buildings that have already upgraded to 500 Mbps or 1 Gbps fibre. At roughly SEK 900–2,000 per household for a WiFi 7 unit, it recovers 55–88% of bandwidth the building is already paying for.
For BRFs still on 100/100 Mbps, the router is not yet the bottleneck — but a speed upgrade on its own is a trap. Raising the line to 500 Mbps or 1 Gbps without upgrading the router simply moves the building into the high-waste tiers above: the household starts paying for gigabit and, on an old router, receives a fraction of it. The two decisions belong together. The sensible path is to plan the speed increase and a WiFi 7 router as a single step — often negotiated into the same group agreement — so the new capacity actually reaches the apartment.
Model assumptions and limitations
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Total population | 1,100,000 households |
| Router distribution | Stock-and-flow model |
| WiFi throughput | Midpoint of measured range |
| WiFi 4 typical | 45 Mbps (2.4 GHz only) |
| WiFi 5 typical | 225 Mbps (5 GHz, 2×2) |
| WiFi 6 typical | 400 Mbps (5 GHz, 2×2) |
| WiFi 7 typical | 750 Mbps (5/6 GHz) |
| Upload adjustment | 20–40% lower than download |
What the model does not capture
Wired devices. Some high-bandwidth devices — gaming PCs, smart TVs, NAS units, desktop computers — may be connected via Ethernet and thus bypass the WiFi bottleneck entirely. In those households, the effective waste is lower than the model suggests. However, industry data shows that the majority of traffic in residential networks now flows over WiFi: smartphones, tablets, laptops, and an increasing share of smart TVs use wireless connections exclusively. We estimate that 75–85% of household devices connect via WiFi.
Mesh systems and access points. Households that have purchased their own mesh WiFi system (separate from the ISP router) may achieve higher throughput than the ISP-supplied equipment suggests. The model uses ISP-default equipment as the baseline, since this is what the vast majority of BRF residents use.
Inter-apartment interference. The throughput figures assume a typical apartment with moderate interference. In buildings with 50+ apartments on the same floor, real-world WiFi 5 throughput can drop well below 225 Mbps due to channel congestion, particularly on 2.4 GHz. The model may therefore understate waste in very dense buildings.
References
The sources below were independently verified (reachable and confirmed to contain the cited fact) during source review on 2026-08-20.
- Bahnhof — Bredband till bostadsrättsföreningar (BRF) — group broadband from SEK 39/month; symmetric fibre tiers (“Samma fart upp och ner”).
- Microsoft — Prepare your organization’s network for Microsoft Teams — video meeting bandwidth 2.5–4.0 Mbps per endpoint.
- ACM SIGCOMM IMC 2024 — Accepted Papers — Sharma & Feamster, “A Longitudinal Study of the Prevalence of WiFi Bottlenecks in Home Access Networks”.
- ASUS — ZenWiFi BT8 Tech Specs — WiFi 7 (802.11be) BE14000, 2×2 / 3×3 spatial streams.
- WIISFI — Will’s WiFi technical reference — most client devices are 2×2 MIMO.
- TechInfoDepot — Inteno EG500 R1 — 802.11n, 2×2, 2.4 GHz only (N300).
- PTS — Svensk telekommarknad 2024 (PTS-ER-2025:9), full report PDF: https://pts.se/contentassets/feb20b39e0f64057a64364d70b70e9a2/rapport-svensk-telekommarknad-2024_t.pdf — 95% of fixed broadband over 100 Mbps; 100/100 the most common fibre tier.
- Companion report — WiFi Router Generations in Swedish Housing Cooperatives (repo:
reports/wifi-router-generations/) — router generation distribution. - Model source —
models/bandwidth_waste_model.py(repo) — throughput midpoints and bandwidth-loss formula.
Additional sources consulted (not individually link-verified):
- PTS Prisrapport 2024
- Bredbandskollen (Internetstiftelsen) averages 2025
- Telenor.se group contracts
- Tele2.se WiFi Hub C4 specifications
- Bredbandsval.se (router overview, group contracts)
- Technicolor TG389ac specifications
- Icotera i4882 datasheet
- Cisco WiFi throughput documentation
- NIST Building Material RF Attenuation Data
- SCB housing stock 2024
- Svensk Betong
Model: Python computation crossing three datasets: router generation distribution (1.1M households), estimated BRF speed distribution (100–1,000 Mbps) and measured WiFi throughput per generation (midpoint of published measurement ranges). Bandwidth loss = max(0, subscription speed − WiFi throughput) / subscription speed. Source code available: bandwidth_waste_model.py.