America's Internet Report Card 2026

How We Scored Each State

Every state receives a composite score from 0 to 100 based on four weighted factors drawn from our analysis of 13.1 million FCC Broadband Data Collection records, cross-referenced with H3 hexagonal grid availability data at approximately 500-meter resolution:

• Broadband Coverage (30%): Percentage of residential addresses with access to at least one provider meeting the FCC's 100/20 Mbps benchmark. This is the baseline measure of whether broadband exists at a given address.
• Fiber Penetration (25%): Percentage of addresses with access to fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) service. Fiber represents the gold standard for consumer broadband — symmetric speeds, no congestion-based degradation, and a 25+ year useful life for the physical infrastructure.
• Provider Competition (25%): Average number of distinct wired and fixed wireless ISPs per address, excluding satellite-only providers. More providers mean more choices, lower prices, and stronger incentives for network investment.
• Market Concentration (20%): The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), inverted so that more competitive markets score higher. HHI is the standard DOJ/FTC metric for evaluating market power. A score below 1,500 indicates a competitive market; above 2,500 signals high concentration that typically correlates with higher prices and slower infrastructure upgrades.

This methodology intentionally emphasizes competition and infrastructure quality over raw speed claims. A state where every address has one cable monopoly delivering 1 Gbps will score lower than a state where most addresses can choose between three 300 Mbps providers — because the competitive market consistently delivers better outcomes for consumers over time.

Source: InternetProviders.ai Methodology, March 2026

Top 10 States: America's Broadband Leaders

The top-performing states share three structural advantages: dense population centers that make deployment economically attractive, at least two major fiber providers competing for market share, and state-level policies that facilitate permitting and right-of-way access. Notably, eight of the top 10 states are in the Northeast or on the coasts, where population density naturally supports competitive broadband markets.

State-by-State Breakdown: Top 10

Bottom 10 States: Where America Falls Short

The bottom 10 states are defined by low population density, challenging terrain, and markets dominated by one or two legacy providers with little competitive pressure. Nine of the 10 are west of the Mississippi River or in the Deep South. These states receive disproportionately high per-capita BEAD allocations — which is precisely the program's intent — but the construction timelines and workforce constraints mean results will not appear in the data for another two to three years.

State-by-State Breakdown: Bottom 10

Market Concentration: The Hidden Driver of Broadband Quality

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is the single most predictive metric in our dataset. When we correlate HHI scores with consumer outcomes, the pattern is unambiguous: states with competitive markets (HHI below 1,500) have average broadband prices 15-20% lower than highly concentrated states (HHI above 2,500). They also have faster average speeds, higher fiber adoption rates, and better customer satisfaction scores in FCC complaint data.

Across all 50 states, the distribution breaks down as follows:

• Competitive (HHI < 1,500): 12 states — predominantly in the Northeast and coastal metro areas. These markets see the most aggressive promotional pricing and fastest network upgrades.
• Moderately Concentrated (HHI 1,500–2,500): 19 states — a mix of suburban Sun Belt states and mid-sized metro areas. Competition exists but is often limited to two dominant carriers.
• Highly Concentrated (HHI > 2,500): 19 states — rural states, mountain states, and areas where a single cable or telco incumbent dominates. Many addresses in these states have only one broadband choice at the 100/20 Mbps standard.

The relationship between fiber deployment and market competition is reinforcing: fiber overbuild lowers HHI by introducing a new competitor, which drives the incumbent to upgrade its own network, which in turn attracts additional entrants. This virtuous cycle is visible in states like Utah, where the UTOPIA open-access network created competition that attracted Google Fiber, which spurred CenturyLink (now Lumen/Quantum Fiber) to deploy its own FTTH network. The result: Utah has a fiber penetration rate of 63% and an HHI of 1,340 — competitive by national standards despite being a western state with meaningful rural territory.

Conversely, in states like Alaska (HHI: 4,120), the absence of infrastructure competition creates a self-reinforcing cycle: the dominant provider has little incentive to invest in upgrades, potential competitors see the low population density and high deployment costs as barriers to entry, and consumers have no leverage to demand better service. Breaking these cycles is the core policy challenge that BEAD funding is designed to address.

Source: DOJ/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines, 2010 (HHI thresholds)

The Fiber Map: Where FTTH Is Winning

National fiber-to-the-home availability stands at 57% of U.S. addresses as of early 2026, up from approximately 44% in our initial analysis and 37% two years prior. This acceleration is driven by three converging forces: AT&T's commitment to pass 30+ million locations with fiber, Frontier Communications' aggressive FTTH conversion of its legacy DSL footprint, and the early phases of BEAD-funded regional deployments.

But the national average masks enormous state-level variation:

• Above 60% fiber: NJ (68%), CT (65%), UT (63%), MD (62%), RI (61%) — these states have reached a tipping point where fiber is the default technology for new connections.
• 40-60% fiber: MA (59%), VA (58%), NY (55%), FL (54%), CA (52%) — fiber is widely available in metro areas but has not yet reached suburban fringe and rural communities.
• Below 30% fiber: MS (18%), AK (15%), MT (19%), AR (21%), WV (22%) — fiber is an exception, not the norm. Most connections in these states rely on cable, DSL, or fixed wireless.

The data supports a clear conclusion: states that crossed the 50% fiber threshold see measurably better broadband outcomes — lower prices, higher speeds, more providers, and lower market concentration. Fiber deployment is not just a technology upgrade; it is the most reliable predictor of a healthy broadband market.

BEAD Funding: Will $42.45 Billion Close the Gap?

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program is the largest federal investment in broadband infrastructure in American history. Authorized under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the $42.45 billion allocation targets unserved locations (lacking 25/3 Mbps) and underserved locations (lacking 100/20 Mbps). The top 10 state allocations by dollar amount:

The challenge is execution. As of March 2026, only a handful of early-moving states — Louisiana, Virginia, and Nevada — have completed subgrantee selection and begun awarding construction contracts. The majority of states are still in the application review phase. Construction timelines for fiber deployment typically run 18 to 36 months from contract award to lit service, meaning most BEAD-funded buildouts will not deliver service until 2028 or later.

Workforce constraints compound the timeline challenge. The telecommunications construction workforce was already strained before BEAD, and the simultaneous deployment of billions of dollars across multiple states has intensified competition for qualified fiber splicers, line workers, and construction engineers. Several states have incorporated workforce development programs into their BEAD plans, but the near-term bottleneck remains real.

Our projection: bottom-10 states could gain 5 to 15 composite points by 2028 if BEAD deployment stays on schedule. That would narrow the gap between the best and worst states from 56 points today to approximately 40-50 points — meaningful progress, but far from parity. The geographic and economic fundamentals that created the digital divide will persist even after BEAD investment is fully deployed.

Source: NTIA BEAD Program, 2026

The Urban-Rural Divide by the Numbers

The single most important variable in predicting broadband quality is not technology, policy, or funding — it is population density. Our data shows the following urban-rural splits when averaged across all 50 states:

Rural Americans pay approximately 36% more per month for broadband that is, on average, slower and less reliable than what urban consumers receive. They have fewer providers to choose from, less fiber access, and live in markets where a single ISP often controls more than 60% of available coverage. This is not a technology problem — the technology to serve rural America exists. It is an economics problem, and BEAD is the largest-ever attempt to solve it with public investment.

What This Means for Consumers

Regardless of where your state ranks, the steps to getting the best broadband deal remain consistent:

1. Check your actual address. State averages can be misleading. A suburban address in a bottom-10 state may still have excellent options, while a rural address in a top-10 state may have limited choices. Use our availability checker to see exactly what serves your location.
2. Prioritize fiber when available. Fiber connections deliver symmetric speeds (equal upload and download), no data caps in most cases, and consistent performance that does not degrade during peak usage hours. Our fiber provider rankings compare the major FTTH carriers.
3. Consider fixed wireless as a competitive alternative. T-Mobile Home Internet and Verizon 5G Home have disrupted local monopolies in many markets. Even if you do not switch, having an alternative gives you leverage to negotiate with your current provider.
4. Calculate total cost, not just the promotional price. Equipment rental fees, post-promotional rate increases, and data cap overage charges can add $20-$40/month to the advertised price. Our Hidden Fees Report breaks down the true cost by provider.
5. Check your state's BEAD timeline. If you are in a bottom-ranked state, new fiber construction may be coming to your area within the next one to three years. State broadband offices publish deployment maps showing planned construction areas.

Full Methodology

This report is based on InternetProviders.ai's analysis of 13.1 million FCC Broadband Data Collection records, aggregated at the state level using H3 hexagonal grid data at approximately 500-meter resolution. Coverage percentages refer to the share of residential addresses with access to at least one provider meeting the specified speed threshold. Provider counts represent distinct wired and fixed wireless ISPs, excluding satellite-only providers.

HHI calculations use provider coverage percentages as market share proxies, following standard DOJ/FTC methodology. Composite scores are calculated as a weighted average of the four component metrics, each normalized to a 0-100 scale before weighting.

The full methodology, including data sources, normalization rules, and known limitations, is available on our methodology page. The data underlying this report is freely available under a CC BY 4.0 license for researchers, journalists, policymakers, and advocacy organizations.

Source: InternetProviders.ai Methodology

Explore More Data

• 2026 U.S. Broadband Access Report — National overview with technology breakdown and rural-urban analysis.
• Hidden Fees Report 2026 — The true cost of internet service, provider by provider.
• State-by-State Coverage Reports — Detailed city-level data for every state.
• Provider Comparison Tool — Side-by-side comparison of internet service providers.
• Embeddable Widget — Add our broadband availability checker to your website for free.

Frequently Asked Questions