Opensignal is the independent global standard for analyzing consumer mobile experience. Our industry reports are the definitive guide to understanding the true experience consumers receive on wireless networks.
Our users on TIM’s network enjoyed the best Video Experience and the operator claims the award with a score of 66.0 points (on a 100-point scale) — 0.4 points ahead of second placed Claro. Both Claro and TIM placed in the Very Good category (65-75) — which means generally fast loading times and only occasional stalling. Oi and Vivo rated Good (55-65), although Vivo only narrowly missed the higher category with its score of 64.2.
Claro wins two of our three experiential awards, Games Experience and Voice App Experience, with scores of 61.7 and 78.2 points respectively on a 100-point scale — ahead of second placed TIM. Both Claro and TIM rated Acceptable (74-80) for Voice App Experience. This means users were generally able to comprehend without repetition, but some may have experienced perceptible call quality impairments.
Claro wins both the Download Speed Experience and Upload Speed Experience awards. Our users on Claro’s network enjoyed average download speeds of 22.6 Mbps. Vivo placed second, with its score being 5.1 Mbps behind leader Claro, while TIM came third, with its users seeing speeds 1.2 Mbps slower than Vivo’s score. Claro also secured the Upload Speed Experience award, with 7.9 Mbps average upload speeds experienced by our users on its network— 1.4 Mbps ahead of Vivo and 1.6 Mbps ahead of TIM.
4G Availability indicates the average proportion of time Opensignal users spend with a 4G or better connection on each operator's network. TIM wins the 4G Availability award, with a score of 89.9%, which means that our 4G users on this network were, on average, connected to 4G nearly 90% of the time. Vivo came second, with a score of 81.2% — 8.7 percentage points behind TIM.
In our latest look at the mobile network experience in Brazil we see mixed fortunes on the awards table. Claro wins four awards — Games Experience, Voice App Experience, Download Speed Experience and Upload Speed Experience. But TIM wins Video Experience and 4G Availability. However, Oi and Vivo miss out on Opensignal awards in this report.
Brazilian operators launched 5G services in 2020 — Claro and Vivo deployed their 5G networks in July 2020, while TIM — in December 2020. All of them used dynamic spectrum sharing (DSS) to launch 5G services using existing spectrum. Brazil is yet to conduct a tender for new 5G spectrum, but one is expected to be announced in August 2021 and will include spectrum in 700 MHz, 2.3 GHz, 3.5 GHz and 26 GHz bands. The regulator, Anatel, expects 5G standalone networks to be deployed in all state capitals by July 2022. Notably, in March 2021 Anatel selected Opensignal as one of their certified crowdsourcing data delivery partners for network monitoring, to support its technical studies, diagnoses, publications and regulatory decisions.
The consortium of three of Brazil’s operators — TIM, Vivo and Claro — bid in December 2020 to split the mobile assets of their cash-strapped competitor, Oi. In total, they agreed to pay BRL 16.5 billion (US$ 3.25 billion) for Oi’s spectrum, cell sites and mobile customers. TIM will pay around BRL 7.3 billion for Oi’s 49 MHz of spectrum, 7,200 sites and 14.5 million mobile subscribers. For BRL5.5 billion, Vivo purchased access to 43 MHz of spectrum, 2,700 sites and 10.5 million mobile customers. Claro acquired 4,700 sites and 11.6 million of Oi’s mobile customers for BRL 3.6 billion. The deal was signed in January 2021, but still needs approval from the regulator Anatel and the Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE).
However, other Brazilian players like Sercomtel and Algar Telecom strongly oppose this acquisition and call for its cancellation or for a partial sale of some of Oi’s assets to third-parties. They highlight that three major Brazilian operators taking over Oi’s mobile infrastructure and customers could lead to increased market concentration. Oi is hoping to receive the approval from Brazilian authorities and finalize the transaction by the end of 2021 or in the beginning of 2022. In the meantime, the ongoing uncertainty will make it hard for Oi to improve its position, notably, the company does not win any mobile network experience awards in this report.
Our results in this report are based on measurements collected across all major mobile operators in Brazil – Claro, Oi, TIM and Vivo – over the period of 90 days between March 1, 2021 and May 29, 2021. 5G measurements contributed to the overall scores.
| Mobile Experience Awards Brazil | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2021,
Brazil Report
|
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
Video Experience
| ||||
Games Experience
| ||||
Voice App Experience
| ||||
Download Speed Experience
| ||||
Upload Speed Experience
| ||||
4G Availability
| ||||
|
Mobile Experience Awards Winners
|
July 2021,
Brazil
|
|---|---|
|
Video Experience
|
T
TIM
|
|
Games Experience
|
C
Claro
|
|
Voice App Experience
|
C
Claro
|
|
Download Speed Experience
|
C
Claro
|
|
Upload Speed Experience
|
C
Claro
|
|
4G Availability
|
T
TIM
|
TIM wins the Video Experience award with a score of 66.0, while Claro came close second, with a score of 65.5, on a 100-point scale. Both operators placed in the Very Good category (65-75) — which means generally fast loading times and only occasional stalling. Oi and Vivo rated Good (55-65), with their scores of 55.0 and 64.2 points — this means less consistent experience, particularly for higher resolutions, with noticeably slower loading times. TIM, Claro and Vivo were separated by less than 2 points. TIM’s victory over Claro was facilitated thanks to the operator’s wide lead in 4G Availability over its competitor. This enabled our users on TIM’s network to benefit from faster and more reliable 4G video services more frequently than those on Claro’s network, which is reflected in the overall scores.
|
Video Experience
Additional Metrics |
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in 0-100 points | ||||
|
4G Video Experience
| 72.2 (± 0.08) | 63.2 (± 0.16) | 69.8 (± 0.09) | 71.5 (± 0.07) |
|
3G Video Experience
| 45.2 (± 0.31) | 38.8 (± 0.37) | 43.7 (± 0.45) | 43.6 (± 0.26) |
| 4G Video Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
72 (± 0.08) |
|
O
Oi
|
63 (± 0.16) |
|
T
TIM
|
70 (± 0.09) |
|
V
Vivo
|
72 (± 0.07) |
| 3G Video Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
45 (± 0.31) |
|
O
Oi
|
39 (± 0.37) |
|
T
TIM
|
44 (± 0.45) |
|
V
Vivo
|
44 (± 0.26) |
Opensignal’s Video Experience quantifies the quality of video streamed to mobile devices by measuring real-world video streams over an operator's networks. The metric is derived from an International Telecommunication Union (ITU)-based approach, built upon detailed studies which have derived a relationship between technical parameters, including picture quality, video loading time and stall rate, with the perceived video experience as reported by real people. To calculate video experience, we are directly measuring video streams from end-user devices and using this ITU-based approach to quantify the overall video experience for each operator on a scale from 0 to 100. The videos tested include a mixture of resolutions and are streamed directly from the world’s largest video content providers.
Claro is still the winner of the Games Experience award, with a score of 61.7 (on a 100-point scale), 5.7 points ahead of second placed TIM. Vivo and Oi were further behind the frontrunners, with scores of 42.4 and 36.4, respectively.
|
Games Experience
Additional Metrics |
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in 0-100 points | ||||
|
4G Games Experience
| 72.1 (± 0.11) | 42.2 (± 0.15) | 62.9 (± 0.17) | 52.2 (± 0.15) |
|
3G Games Experience
| 37.5 (± 0.09) | 31.9 (± 0.06) | 35.0 (± 0.07) | 34.0 (± 0.05) |
| 4G Games Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
72 (± 0.11) |
|
O
Oi
|
42 (± 0.15) |
|
T
TIM
|
63 (± 0.17) |
|
V
Vivo
|
52 (± 0.15) |
| 3G Games Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
37 (± 0.09) |
|
O
Oi
|
32 (± 0.06) |
|
T
TIM
|
35 (± 0.07) |
|
V
Vivo
|
34 (± 0.05) |
Our Games Experience metric measures real-world mobile network conditions to assess the mobile multiplayer games experience perceived by our users on different cellular networks. It analyzes how the multiplayer mobile Games Experience is affected by mobile network conditions including UDP latency, packet loss and jitter. Additionally, it considers multiple genres of multiplayer mobile games — to measure the average sensitivity to network conditions — such as Battle Royale and MOBA games of which PUBG, Fortnite and Arena of Valor are examples.
Similarly to the Games Experience award, Claro comes first in the Voice App Experience category, ahead of its competitor, TIM. Claro secured the award with a score of 78.2 points (on a 100-point scale), 3.5 points ahead of second placed TIM. Both Claro and TIM rated Acceptable (74-80) for the Voice App Experience, while Vivo and Oi placed in the category below — Poor (66-74).
|
Voice App Experience
Additional Metrics |
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in 0-100 points | ||||
|
4G Voice App Experience
| 80.5 (± 0.05) | 73.2 (± 0.11) | 76.0 (± 0.08) | 74.7 (± 0.06) |
|
3G Voice App Experience
| 70.9 (± 0.12) | 60.3 (± 0.19) | 66.6 (± 0.19) | 64.4 (± 0.14) |
| 4G Voice App Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
81 (± 0.05) |
|
O
Oi
|
73 (± 0.11) |
|
T
TIM
|
76 (± 0.08) |
|
V
Vivo
|
75 (± 0.06) |
| 3G Voice App Experience | in 0-100 points |
|
C
Claro
|
71 (± 0.12) |
|
O
Oi
|
60 (± 0.19) |
|
T
TIM
|
67 (± 0.19) |
|
V
Vivo
|
64 (± 0.14) |
Opensignal's Voice App Experience measures the quality of experience for over-the-top (OTT) voice services — mobile voice apps such as WhatsApp, Skype and Facebook Messenger. — using a model derived from the International ITU-based approach for quantifying overall voice call quality and a series of calibrated technical parameters. This model characterizes the exact relationship between the technical measurements and perceived call quality.
Our users on Claro’s network enjoyed average download speeds of 22.6 Mbps — the only operator in Brazil to go above the 20 Mbps threshold. Average download speeds experienced by our users on Claro were 5.1 Mbps (28.9%) faster than on second placed Vivo, which saw speeds of 17.6 Mbps. TIM came third with average speeds of 16.3 Mbps and Oi lagged behind, with our users seeing average download speeds of 11.9 Mbps — about half the speeds experienced by our users on Claro’s network.
|
Download Speed Experience
Additional Metrics |
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in Mbps | ||||
|
4G Download Speed
| 28.3 (± 0.08) | 15.6 (± 0.08) | 18.3 (± 0.05) | 22.1 (± 0.05) |
|
3G Download Speed
| 5.3 (± 0.03) | 4.4 (± 0.04) | 5.1 (± 0.04) | 4.6 (± 0.02) |
| 4G Download Speed | in Mbps |
|
C
Claro
|
28 (± 0.08) |
|
O
Oi
|
16 (± 0.08) |
|
T
TIM
|
18 (± 0.05) |
|
V
Vivo
|
22 (± 0.05) |
| 3G Download Speed | in Mbps |
|
C
Claro
|
5 (± 0.03) |
|
O
Oi
|
4 (± 0.04) |
|
T
TIM
|
5 (± 0.04) |
|
V
Vivo
|
5 (± 0.02) |
Looking at the average 4G download speeds experienced by our users in Brazil, two operators exceeded the 20 Mbps milestone — Claro with 28.3 Mbps and Vivo with 22.1 Mbps.
Aside from the Download Speed Experience award, Claro also won our other speed award — the Upload Speed Experience award. Our users on Claro saw average upload speeds of 7.9 Mbps, while those on second place Vivo — 6.5 Mbps. Average upload speeds as experienced by our users on TIM’s network were just 0.2 Mbps lower than on Vivo’s network, while Oi’s average upload speeds rated below 5 Mbps.
|
Upload Speed Experience
Additional Metrics |
C
Claro
|
O
Oi
|
T
TIM
|
V
Vivo
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| in Mbps | ||||
|
4G Upload Speed
| 10.0 (± 0.03) | 6.4 (± 0.04) | 7.2 (± 0.03) | 8.2 (± 0.03) |
|
3G Upload Speed
| 1.5 (± 0.01) | 1.1 (± 0.02) | 1.3 (± 0.02) | 1.6 (± 0.01) |
| 4G Upload Speed | in Mbps |
|
C
Claro
|
10 (± 0.03) |
|
O
Oi
|
6 (± 0.04) |
|
T
TIM
|
7 (± 0.03) |
|
V
Vivo
|
8 (± 0.03) |
| 3G Upload Speed | in Mbps |
|
C
Claro
|
1 (± 0.01) |
|
O
Oi
|
1 (± 0.02) |
|
T
TIM
|
1 (± 0.02) |
|
V
Vivo
|
2 (± 0.01) |
Claro is the only operator in Brazil to hit the 10 Mbps threshold for the average 4G upload speeds experienced by our users.
TIM defends the 4G Availability award, with a score of 89.9% — this is the proportion of time our users on its network were connected to 4G. TIM came 8.7 percentage points ahead of second placed Vivo. Claro scored 78.6% in this metric, while Oi rated right under the 70% threshold, ending with a score of 69.7%. TIM’s lead over Claro in 4G Availability allowed our users on TIM’s network to benefit from faster and more reliable 4G services more frequently. This boosted TIM’s scores in our experiential and speed metrics and, consequently, helped it secure the overall Video Experience award.
4G Availability shows the proportion of time users with a 4G device and subscription have a 4G connection. It measures what proportion of time people have a 4G network connection in the places they most commonly frequent, something often missed by traditional coverage metrics. High 4G availability positively affects overall scores in our speed or experiential metrics.
Collecting billions of individual measurements daily from over 100 million devices globally, Opensignal independently analyzes mobile user experience on every major network operator around the globe.
Opensignal is the mobile analytics company committed to improving mobile connectivity across the globe. We are the independent authority for understanding the true experience consumers receive on wireless networks.
Get in touch for more information on our analytics solutions and industry reports.
Opensignal Limited retains ownership of this report including all intellectual property rights, data, content, graphs & analysis. Reports produced by Opensignal Limited may not be quoted, reproduced, distributed, published for any commercial purpose (including use in advertisements or other promotional content) without prior written consent. Journalists are encouraged to quote information included in Opensignal reports provided they include clear source attribution. For more information, contact [email protected].
