2026 heat-pump brand share in the Baltics vs Benelux

Baltics vs Benelux: who actually controls the 2026 heat-pump shelf

The short answer is that the research corpus does not contain bloc-level EPREL brand-share data for the Baltics or Benelux. It contains an EU-wide brand ranking, an EU-wide type aggregate, an EU-wide refrigerant declaration table, and six relevant national electricity-to-gas tariff ratios, but no country-tagged model counts by brand, refrigerant or type. That means the registry data provided here cannot support a numeric ranking of “who is winning” in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania combined versus Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg combined.

That limitation matters because the core questions on top brand share, the gap between the first and second brands, the number of manufacturers needed to reach 80% of listings, bloc-level refrigerant mix, and bloc-level product-type mix all require country- or region-filtered EPREL counts that are absent from the corpus. The country comparison dashboard, the live EPREL catalog, and the leaderboards hub are the natural places to check when those filtered views are available on-platform, but the underlying JSON here does not expose them.

What can be said is narrower but still useful. Across the full EPREL heat-pump universe covered by this corpus, Daikin Europe N.V. accounts for 14,668 listed models and a 24.05% share, ahead of Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V. on 5,575 models and 9.14%, with JOHNSON CONTROLS HITACHI AIR CONDITIONING EUROPE SAS, SUCURSAL EN ESPAÑA third on 5,207 models and 8.54% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). The gap between first and second place at EU level is 14.91 percentage points, or 9,093 models (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

That is a useful baseline for reading any regional comparison, especially via the manufacturer index at all brands or individual profiles such as Bosch Thermotechnik GmbH, Ariston SpA, Vaillant GmbH and BDR Thermea Group B.V.. But it is still only a baseline: the corpus does not show whether the Baltics are more concentrated than Benelux by model count.

How concentrated are the two blocs' brand landscapes?

Again, the corpus does not provide the bloc-level model distributions needed to calculate concentration directly. So the specific questions cannot be answered numerically from this dataset:

• the top brand share in the Baltics combined versus Benelux combined;
• the gap between the number one and number two brands in each bloc;
• the number of manufacturers required to reach 80% of listed models in each bloc;
• the average SCOP of the leading brands in each bloc.

The registry snapshot here only exposes the top 20 manufacturers for Europe as a whole, not for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belgium, Netherlands or Luxembourg. That means the editorial angle — that the Baltics appear more concentrated and Benelux broader — may be plausible, but it is not provable from the supplied JSON.

What the EU-wide ranking does show is a very lopsided shelf overall. The top three manufacturers together represent 41.73% of listed models, or 25,450 units out of 60,989 (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). The top five reach 51.93%, or 31,670 models (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). For readers comparing catalog depth rather than sales, that is a reminder that EPREL listing volume is already concentrated before any regional filtering.

Average SCOP among those same leading EU-wide brands also varies enough to complicate any simple “biggest equals best” claim. Daikin’s average SCOP is 4.44, while Mitsubishi Electric posts 4.51, Bosch 4.69, Ariston 4.66 and Vaillant 4.54 (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). At EU level, then, the largest brand by model count is not the highest-SCOP brand among the major listed manufacturers in the corpus.

For buyers hunting outright efficiency rather than catalog breadth, the more relevant navigation path is the top SCOP leaderboard and the air-to-water SCOP leaderboard, not raw brand-share tables.

Refrigerants: R290, R32 and what each bloc is shipping

The corpus includes a refrigerant universe and declared usage counts, but these are not regionalised. So it cannot answer the brief’s request for the share of listed models using R290, R32 and other refrigerants in the Baltics versus Benelux. The registry does not record those bloc-level shares in the JSON provided.

At aggregate level, declared refrigerant usage is dominated by R32 with 13,935 declarations, followed by R410A on 1,896 and a further 49 entries declared as “R410a” with different casing; R290 appears on 537 declarations, with another 3 entries split across “R290A” and “R290a” (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). Because declarations include inconsistent casing and spelling, any exact market-share comparison should be read as a declared-code count rather than a fully harmonised installed-base measure.

Still, the direction of travel in the reference table is clear enough. R290 models in the catalog use propane, classified as natural with GWP 0 and flammability class A3, while R32 has GWP 771 and flammability class A2L, with a listed phase-out date of 2027-01-01 in the corpus reference table (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). R134a is shown with GWP 1300 and a phase-out date of 2026-01-01, while R410A is shown with GWP 1924 and a phase-out date of 2025-01-01 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes).

For readers tracking compliance pressure and refrigerant choices, the refrigerants reference and the underlying EU F-gas regulation matter more than bloc speculation unsupported by filtered counts.

Product mix: air-water dominance, niche types and efficiency tiers

The same data gap applies to product mix by region. The corpus does not provide Baltics-versus-Benelux shares for air-water, ground-water, water-water, air-air or heat-pump water-heater models. Nor does it provide bloc-level average SCOP or capacity by type. Those questions require region-specific type aggregations that are not present.

What it does provide is an EU-wide type picture, and that picture is heavily shaped by air-to-water heat pumps. Air-water models account for 30,452 listings out of the five reported categories, versus 21,065 for air-air heat pumps, 9,228 for heat-pump water heaters, 213 for ground-water heat pumps, and 31 for water-water heat pumps (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation).

On efficiency and size, the differences are sizeable:

(type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation)

Two points stand out. First, water-water systems are a tiny niche by listing count but have the highest average SCOP at 6.15 and the highest average capacity at 35.65 kW (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). Second, air-water is the clear mainstream hydronic segment, with a much larger shelf presence and an average SCOP of 4.54 at 11.83 kW (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation).

The brief asks whether smaller-market brands skew toward higher-capacity or higher-efficiency models in the Baltics versus Benelux. The corpus cannot answer that: there is no cross-tab between brand size, region, type and performance. Readers who need model-level filtering should use the full catalog, the smallest-capacity leaderboard, or the ground-source SCOP leaderboard.

Do the leading brands also lead on SCOP?

Not at EU level, and the corpus does not let us test it separately for the Baltics and Benelux.

Among the top five manufacturers by listed model count, Daikin leads on volume at 24.05% but not on average SCOP, where Bosch reaches 4.69 and Ariston 4.66, ahead of Mitsubishi Electric at 4.51 and Daikin at 4.44 (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Even further down the top-20 list, STIEBEL ELTRON GmbH & CO. KG is shown at 4.84 and LG Electronics Deutschland GmbH at 4.93 average SCOP, albeit on much smaller model counts of 433 and 405 respectively (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Those brand pages are not provided as contextual slugs in the prompt, so the corpus only supports naming them, not linking them to dedicated profiles here.

That leaves the regional question unresolved. The dataset does not contain “leading brand in Baltics” or “leading brand in Benelux”, so it cannot tell us whether the local number-one brand in either bloc also posts the highest bloc-level average SCOP.

A more defensible reading is narrower: in the European EPREL shelf overall, listing breadth and average SCOP are related imperfectly. Large brands are present across many segments; the most efficient averages can sit with brands that have far fewer registered models (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). For practical model selection, a payback calculator, sizing calculator, and the methodology notes are more useful than brand volume alone.

What tariffs say about where the economics are friendliest

This is the one part of the brief the corpus can answer cleanly for all six countries.

Using the supplied breakeven threshold of roughly 3.7 for a SCOP 4 heat pump, five of the six markets across the Baltics and Benelux sit below that threshold in the latest tariff snapshot (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). Those five are:

• Netherlands at 1.49 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester)
• Lithuania at 2.86 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester)
• Latvia at 2.97 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester)
• Luxembourg at 2.99 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester)
• Estonia at 3.03 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester)

Belgium is above the threshold at 3.9 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

Split by bloc, that means all three Baltic markets are below the ~3.7 threshold, while two of the three Benelux markets are below it (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). On this narrow tariff metric, the Baltics look uniformly friendlier than Benelux, because Benelux includes one clear outlier: Belgium at 3.9 versus the Netherlands at 1.49 and Luxembourg at 2.99 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

For households comparing running-cost conditions rather than shelf composition, that is the strongest bloc-level distinction the corpus actually supports. The underlying tariff source is Eurostat, and it is worth pairing those price ratios with local support schemes on country subsidies and national pages such as Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Sources

• EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation — snapshot 2026-07-13
• EPREL Public API · type aggregation — snapshot 2026-07-13
• IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes — snapshot 2026-07-13
• Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester — snapshot 2026-07-13
• Probe failed — data unavailable: Manufacturer slug midea not found — no snapshot date provided
• Probe failed — data unavailable: Manufacturer slug daikin not found — no snapshot date provided

Continue reading

• Heat pump payback calculator — Compare tariff assumptions, efficiency and running costs before choosing a system.
• How to size a heat pump correctly — Why emitter temperature, peak load and oversizing risk matter more than brochure labels.
• R290 vs R32 heat pumps explained — A practical primer on refrigerants, safety class and regulatory pressure.
• Air-to-water vs air-to-air heat pumps — A straightforward comparison of the two biggest product categories in the catalog.