2026 heat-pump refrigerant market share in the Nordics vs the Baltics

What refrigerants dominate the 2026 heat-pump listings?

At EU-wide level, the EPREL heat-pump catalog remains overwhelmingly an R32 market in 2026. Out of 60,989 listed models, 13,935 declare R32 (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). R410A appears on 1,896 models, while R290 appears on 537 models, with a scattering of legacy or anomalous declarations such as R410a at 49 and single-digit counts for several other codes (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

That makes R32 the dominant declared refrigerant by count in the current EPREL universe, while natural refrigerants remain a small minority overall: 3.27% of models use a natural refrigerant code across the full market basket (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). The reference refrigerant table also shows why the regulatory discussion is so active around this shift: R290 has declared GWP 0, R32 has GWP 771, R410A has GWP 1,924, and R134a has GWP 1,300 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). The underlying phase-out schedule in EU Regulation 2024/573 is therefore highly relevant to how buyers should read current listings, even if EPREL still contains older declarations.

For readers comparing live stock rather than market averages, the easiest way to inspect this split is the catalog filtered to R32 heat pumps and R290 heat pumps, or the broader refrigerants reference that explains code families and phase-down status.

The problem for the requested Nordic-versus-Baltic comparison is simpler: the research corpus supplied here does not include a regional split by refrigerant, country basket, brand, type, or efficiency. It provides only EU-wide EPREL aggregates as of 2026-06-26 (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). So the registry-backed answer is that EPREL data in this corpus supports an EU refrigerant composition reading, but not a Nordic-versus-Baltic ranking.

Nordics vs Baltics: where R290, R32, and the rest are most common

The seed asks for the share of R290, R32, and other refrigerants in Nordic markets versus Baltic markets. The corpus does not contain those regional baskets, and the registry extract here does not identify Nordic and Baltic subsets at all. That means no defensible percentage split can be published for those two regions from this dataset.

What can be said, numerically, is how many refrigerant codes are represented in the wider EPREL heat-pump universe covered by this snapshot. The declared usage list contains 22 distinct codes or code variants, including formatting variants such as R410A, R410a, and R410, and likewise R290, R290A, and R290a (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). The reference table itself lists 15 standardized refrigerant entries, spanning HFO, HFC, blend, hydrocarbon, and other natural refrigerants (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes).

That distinction matters. The EPREL declared universe is not a neat chemistry table; it is a registry of manufacturer-entered declarations, including case differences and apparent legacy strings. So when readers compare the live EPREL catalog with our methodology notes, it is worth remembering that declared-code diversity is partly a data-quality issue rather than proof of a broad real-world installed mix.

Relative to the overall EU universe in this corpus, several refrigerants are clearly material and several are merely present:

The under- or over-representation of any refrigerant in the Nordics or Baltics specifically cannot be measured from this corpus. For that level of detail, readers should use the 32-country comparison dashboard once the relevant country filters are applied, but those filtered results are not part of the evidence block provided here.

Efficiency patterns by refrigerant: does the high-end mix differ?

The article brief asks for average SCOP differences between dominant refrigerants in the Nordics and Baltics, especially R290 versus R32. Again, the corpus does not contain SCOP grouped by refrigerant, nor grouped by refrigerant within regional baskets. It therefore cannot support a numeric claim that one refrigerant is more efficient than another in the Nordics or Baltics.

The only robust efficiency baseline available here is the full-market average SCOP of 4.55 across all listed models (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API), plus type-level averages. Among types, water-water models have the highest average SCOP at 6.15 from 31 models, ground-water models average 4.77 from 213 models, and air-water models average 4.54 from 30,452 models (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). Air-air and heat-pump water heaters do not have SCOP values reported in this type table (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation).

That is still useful context. If a regional basket contains more ground-water models or water-water models, its average efficiency could skew upward even without any refrigerant effect. Conversely, a basket dominated by air-water models will tend to sit close to the market average SCOP of 4.54–4.55 (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation; market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

The brief also asks whether the most efficient Nordic and Baltic models are disproportionately linked to one refrigerant, and what SCOP spread exists among top-listed models. The corpus includes probes for top SCOP models filtered to R290 and R32, but both return empty datasets (top_models / EPREL Public API via Househeating Pulse catalog). So the registry-backed answer is straightforward: the supplied extract does not record usable top-model SCOP rankings by refrigerant.

Readers wanting current leaderboard views can still consult top SCOP overall, top SCOP air-to-water, and top SCOP ground-source, but those pages are outside the numbers explicitly provided in this corpus.

Brand concentration and model availability across the two regions

The regional comparison cannot be completed numerically because no Nordic or Baltic brand split is supplied. What the corpus does show clearly is strong concentration at EU-wide level.

The largest manufacturer in the EPREL snapshot is Daikin Europe N.V. with 14,668 models and a 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% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation), and JOHNSON CONTROLS HITACHI AIR CONDITIONING EUROPE SAS, SUCURSAL EN ESPAÑA at 5,207 models and 8.54% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

The top five is completed by Bosch Thermotechnik GmbH with 3,602 models and 5.91% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation) and Ariston SpA with 2,618 models and 4.29% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

Adding the top three brands gives a combined 41.73% share of all listed models (24.05% + 9.14% + 8.54%) (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Adding the top five raises that to 51.93% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). The top 10 brands together account for 60.88% of listings, based on the reported shares for ranks 1–10 (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Across the full market, there are 777 manufacturers (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API), so the tail is long, but the head is still very heavy.

That matters for model availability. A buyer comparing all manufacturers or drilling into Daikin’s filtered catalog is not looking at a fragmented market. The current EPREL list is dominated by a handful of very large portfolios.

What the type mix says about market structure and buyer choice

Even without a Nordic/Baltic split, the EU type mix already explains much of the market structure that regional baskets typically reflect.

Air-water models are the largest category by far at 30,452 listings, equal to roughly half the full catalog (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). Air-air follows at 21,065 models, then heat-pump water heaters at 9,228, while ground-water stands at 213 and water-water at 31 (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

As shares of the full 60,989-model market, that is about 49.9% for air-water, 34.5% for air-air, 15.1% for heat-pump water heaters, 0.35% for ground-water, and 0.05% for water-water (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). Efficiency differs by type as noted above, but so does scale: average declared power is 35.65 kW for water-water, 18.45 kW for ground-water, 11.83 kW for air-water, and 5.41 kW for air-air (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation).

For buyers and installers, the practical reading is that “market choice” in EPREL mostly means choice within air-water and air-air segments, not across all possible thermodynamic architectures. Readers can check the shape of that inventory directly in the air-water catalog, air-air catalog, and broader market index snapshot.

The practical takeaway for buyers, installers, and market watchers

The editorial angle in the brief — colder-climate Nordic baskets leaning toward higher-end refrigerant mixes, and Baltic baskets looking more concentrated and price-sensitive — may well be testable in a broader dataset. It is not testable from the corpus supplied here.

What this corpus does support is narrower but still useful:

• The 2026 EPREL heat-pump universe is still dominated by R32 declarations at 13,935 models, with R410A still visible at 1,896 and R290 much smaller at 537 (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).
• Natural refrigerants remain a small minority at 3.27% of all listed models (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).
• The catalog is heavily concentrated among a few manufacturers, with the top five accounting for 51.93% of models and the top 10 for 60.88% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).
• Air-water dominates the type mix at 30,452 models and sits close to the market-average SCOP, while higher-SCOP ground-water and water-water products are niche by count (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation; market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

For a buyer, that means refrigerant talk should be separated from listing abundance. R32 clearly wins on listing volume in the current EPREL dataset; that does not by itself prove better cold-climate performance, lower running cost, or higher SCOP in any given region. For installers, type and application still matter at least as much as refrigerant code, and the climate-fit tool, sizing calculator, and payback calculator are more decision-relevant than headline chemistry alone. For journalists and market watchers, the cleaner story in this corpus is concentration and declared-code composition, not a substantiated Nordics-versus-Baltics split.

Sources

• refrigerant_universe — IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes (as of 2026-06-26)
• market_index_snapshot — Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API (snapshot 2026-06-26)
• brand_share — EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation (as of 2026-06-26)
• type_efficiency — EPREL Public API · type aggregation (as of 2026-06-26)
• top_models — EPREL Public API via Househeating Pulse catalog, refrigerant=R290, sort_by=scop_desc, limit=15 (as of 2026-06-26; empty result)
• top_models — EPREL Public API via Househeating Pulse catalog, refrigerant=R32, sort_by=scop_desc, limit=15 (as of 2026-06-26; empty result)

Continue reading

• How to read EPREL heat-pump listings — A practical walkthrough of model fields, metrics, and common declaration quirks.
• R290 vs R32 for home heat pumps — What the refrigerant codes do and do not tell buyers about performance and compliance.
• SCOP, flow temperature and climate zone explained — A compact primer on the efficiency metrics that matter more than brochure claims.
• How to compare heat-pump brands in EPREL — Use listing depth, efficiency distribution, and type mix to compare manufacturers properly.