2026 heat-pump market index: Estonia vs Latvia vs Lithuania

How big is the Baltic heat-pump market in 2026?

The Baltic comparison needs one caveat up front: the current research corpus does not include EPREL model counts, manufacturer counts, SCOP averages, noise averages, refrigerant mix or prices broken out separately for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The available registry work is an EU-wide snapshot plus country-level energy and climate context. That means any claim about which Baltic country has the “biggest catalog” or the “cheapest listings” would be fabricated. The registry does not record that in the corpus.

What the corpus does show is the size and structure of the wider European catalogue that Baltic buyers and installers are effectively shopping from. Househeating Pulse’s current market index tracks 60,989 heat-pump models and 777 manufacturers across the EPREL public dataset as of 2026-07-15 (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). The same snapshot reports an overall average SCOP of 4.55, average declared capacity of 9.3 kW, and average outdoor sound power of 61.3 dB (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

For a live view of that wider catalogue, the relevant starting points are the market index, the full EPREL heat-pump catalog, and the 32-country comparison dashboard.

For Baltic households, the country-level energy backdrop differs materially even before model choice enters the picture:

(Lithuania figures: price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester; country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register. Latvia figures: price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester; country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register. Estonia figures: price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester; country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register.)

That already suggests the editorial point supported by the data: in the Baltics, “best value” is unlikely to mean simply “lowest upfront listing price”. Lithuania has the lowest electricity price at €0.1955/kWh and the lowest electricity-to-gas ratio at 2.86 among the three (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). Estonia is slightly colder at 4,474.47 heating degree days than Lithuania at 4,423.05 and Latvia at 4,407.08 (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). A small SCOP difference can therefore matter more than a small ticket-price difference, but the corpus does not provide Baltic listing prices to quantify that directly.

Which country has the strongest model and brand depth?

This is the most important unanswered ranking in the brief, and the answer is blunt: the corpus cannot rank Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania by EPREL model count or manufacturer count. No probe provides country-sliced Baltic catalog depth. So the numerical gap between the largest and smallest Baltic market cannot be stated from this dataset.

What can be stated is how concentrated the broader EPREL market is at brand level. The largest brand in the tracked catalogue is Daikin Europe N.V. with 14,668 models and 24.05% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). It is followed by Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V. at 5,575 models and 9.14% share, and JOHNSON CONTROLS HITACHI AIR CONDITIONING EUROPE SAS, SUCURSAL EN ESPAÑA at 5,207 models and 8.54% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

A few more large-volume brands help show the available choice set that Baltic buyers encounter in the manufacturer directory: Bosch Thermotechnik GmbH has 3,602 models and 5.91% share, Ariston SpA has 2,618 models and 4.29% share, ATLANTIC SOC FRANCAISE DEVELOP THERMIQUE has 1,516 models and 2.49% share, Vaillant GmbH has 1,195 models and 1.96% share, and BDR Thermea Group B.V. has 925 models and 1.52% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

That matters for the Baltics because if local distribution is narrow, installers may still be drawing from a very concentrated upstream supply base. Readers looking for depth by supplier can use the live brand leaderboard and brand-filtered catalog pages such as Daikin listings.

Efficiency and noise: where the best-performing listings sit

Again, the corpus does not provide country-level average SCOP, average power capacity or average outdoor noise for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania individually. So there is no defensible Baltic-country ranking on those exact metrics.

At EU catalogue level, the average heat pump in the index posts SCOP 4.55, 9.3 kW capacity and 61.3 dB outdoor noise (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). By type, the picture is more useful.

(type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation)

On efficiency, water-water leads with average SCOP 6.15 from 31 models (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). On capacity, it also leads at 35.65 kW average, and on quietness it is lowest at 42.0 dB (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). But that is a tiny niche. For mainstream residential work, air-water is the decisive category with 30,452 models and average SCOP 4.54 (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation), and readers can inspect the current air-to-water SCOP leaderboard directly.

This matters in the Baltics because all three countries sit in the colder climate zone category in the country comparison probe: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are each labelled “colder” (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). That does not tell us which country’s listings are more efficient, but it does mean model choice should be judged against cold-climate performance rather than catalogue breadth alone. Our climate-fit tool, climate-zones explainer and sizing calculator are better decision aids than raw count comparisons here.

Refrigerants: who relies on what, and what that means for 2026

The refrigerant story is available, but only at aggregate EPREL level rather than by Baltic country. The corpus therefore cannot say whether Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania relies more heavily on one refrigerant than another.

Across the tracked catalogue, R32 dominates with 13,935 listings (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). R410A follows at 1,896 listings, with lower-case or variant declarations adding 49 listings for R410a, 10 for R410, and 1 for R41OA (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). R290 appears on 537 listings, with another 2 listings for R290A and 1 for R290a (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). Natural refrigerants represent only 3.27% of the market snapshot overall (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

Using the refrigerant reference table, the main families in play are:

(listing counts: refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes)

For practical filtering, readers can inspect current R32 heat pumps and R290 heat pumps, then cross-check the broader refrigerants reference. The regulatory context is tied to the EU F-gas framework, reflected in the corpus via EU Reg. 2024/573 and can be checked against the official regulation text.

The key 2026 implication is straightforward: Baltic buyers should expect to see a catalogue still overwhelmingly led by R32 volume, while R290 remains much smaller but strategically important because it carries GWP 0 and A3 flammability, versus GWP 771 and A2L for R32 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes).

Price versus performance: is better efficiency costing more?

The corpus does not provide country-level EPREL listing prices for Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania. It therefore cannot answer how typical listed prices differ across the three, nor whether the most efficient Baltic market carries a measurable listing-price premium.

What it can answer is the energy-cost side of the equation. Lithuania has the lowest household electricity price of the three at €0.1955/kWh, ahead of Estonia at €0.2303/kWh and Latvia at €0.2452/kWh (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). Lithuania also has the lowest electricity-to-gas ratio at 2.86, compared with 2.97 in Latvia and 3.03 in Estonia (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

That makes Lithuania the most forgiving Baltic market if two candidate systems are close on efficiency. Estonia, by contrast, combines a colder climate with the highest electricity-to-gas penalty of the three: 4,474.47 HDD and a 3.03 electricity-to-gas ratio (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register; price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). Latvia sits between the two on climate and ratio: 4,407.08 HDD and 2.97 (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register; price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

So the strongest supported conclusion is not “country X has the cheapest heat pumps”. It is that Lithuania currently offers the best electricity-price context for heat-pump economics among the three Baltics, while Estonia demands the most from system efficiency because of colder conditions and a less favourable electricity-to-gas ratio (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester; country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Readers can test their own assumptions with the heat-pump payback calculator.

What this means for buyers and installers in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania

For 2026, the Baltic procurement story is less about a country “winning” on model count and more about matching a broadly European product pool to three fairly similar but not identical operating contexts.

Three points stand out from the corpus:

First, cold-climate suitability matters in all three markets. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are all tagged as colder climate-zone countries (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). That pushes attention toward robust air-to-water performance, sensible sizing and defrost behaviour, not just headline efficiency. The quietest-model leaderboard and top SCOP listings help narrow that field.

Second, electricity economics currently favour Lithuania. Its electricity price is €0.1955/kWh against €0.2303/kWh in Estonia and €0.2452/kWh in Latvia, while its elec/gas ratio is the lowest at 2.86 (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). If two systems are similarly priced, that backdrop gives higher-SCOP units more room to pay back well in Lithuania.

Third, catalogue composition matters as much as sticker price. In the EU-wide EPREL stock, air-water units account for 30,452 models out of 60,989 total, or just under half the tracked market, while air-air contributes 21,065 models and heat-pump water heaters 9,228 models (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). Meanwhile, R32 dominates at 13,935 declared listings, far ahead of 537 R290 entries (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). Buyers weighing future refrigerant strategy should browse the live R290 catalog, compare it with the wider heat-pump catalog, and check label data against the EPREL public portal.

What cannot yet be said from the corpus is whether Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania has the deepest local model range, the strongest manufacturer diversity, the best average SCOP, or the lowest typical EPREL listing prices. The registry does not record those Baltic slices here. Until it does, the safest Baltic ranking is on energy context, not local catalogue mythology: Lithuania first, Latvia second, Estonia third on electricity-to-gas ratio (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). For buyers, that is often more useful than a raw count of listings.

Sources

• market_index_snapshot — Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.
• brand_share — EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.
• type_efficiency — EPREL Public API · type aggregation. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.
• refrigerant_universe — IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.
• price_ratio — Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.
• country_compare — Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register. Snapshot date: 2026-07-15.

Continue reading

• How to compare heat-pump SCOP across EPREL listings — A practical framework for reading seasonal efficiency without overrating one headline number.
• R290 vs R32 heat pumps — What refrigerant choice changes for performance, regulation and installation practice.
• How to size a heat pump for a cold-climate home — Why design load and emitters matter more than nominal nameplate capacity.
• Heat-pump payback: what to check before buying — A short checklist linking tariff structure, SCOP and capital cost.