Brussels—A report released today by Transport & Environment (T&E) has shed light on the stark disparities among European rail operators. UK companies notably lag behind their continental counterparts in service quality despite charging premium ticket prices. The comprehensive ranking, which evaluates 27 European rail operators across eight key criteria, places Trenitalia, SBB, and RegioJet at the top, while UK operators struggle at the bottom.
Italy’s Trenitalia clinched the top spot for its exceptional travel experience, while Switzerland’s SBB was lauded for its unmatched punctuality. RegioJet from the Czech Republic stood out for offering some of the most affordable tickets in Europe. Meanwhile, UK operators Avanti, GWR, and Eurostar ranked 19th, 22nd, and 27th, respectively, revealing a significant gap between their high fares and the quality of service provided.
Affordability emerged as a critical factor in passengers’ choices for long-distance rail travel, constituting 25% of the final score. However, T&E’s analysis found that major European operators like Deutsche Bahn (DB) and SNCF are not among the most affordable. Remarkably, the three UK operators—Avanti, GWR, and Eurostar—were identified as the most expensive in Europe.
Special fares and reductions, ease of booking, and reliability were other key criteria, each contributing 15% to the overall ranking. The findings indicate that while most operators offer competitive deals for daily or seasonal travellers, 21 out of 27 fail to make all their tickets available six months in advance. Only 11 operators achieve punctuality rates above 80%.
European operators generally provided a good booking experience, with Eurostar leading the way by offering tickets up to 11 months in advance. GWR and Avanti also performed well in this category, providing their weekly tickets six and three months in advance, respectively, and their weekend tickets three months and 11 weeks in advance. However, reliability remains challenging for many operators, including Avanti and Eurostar.
High pricing, limited traveller experience, and inadequate cycling policies were among the factors contributing to the poor performance of some operators. Nevertheless, low performers such as Avanti and GWR led the way in compensation policies, offering refunds for delays as short as 15 minutes—a standard that could serve as a benchmark for other EU operators.
Victor Thévenet, rail policy manager at T&E, commented: “To unlock rail’s full potential, tickets must be affordable. This is a shared responsibility between the industry and governments. Rail operators need to set customer-friendly fares, while governments make sure this happens. That’s the ticket to making train travel accessible to all Europeans.”
International connections are vital for boosting rail travel across Europe. The EU aims to increase passenger numbers through regulations that simplify cross-border trips, with significant potential to improve services via key routes like the Channel Tunnel. While rail services between major EU cities exist, they often fall short of meeting travellers’ needs.
Michael Solomon Williams of the Campaign for Better Transport noted: “There is massive untapped potential for new and more affordable services, with opportunities for new operators and destinations. Governments should produce International Rail Strategies with targets to shift journeys from air to rail and work to reduce rail tolls which are considerably higher in some countries.”
The 27 rail operators were ranked based on eight criteria, selected and weighted according to their importance to consumers and the number of sub-criteria included. The weighting reflects insights from McKinsey, Europe on Rail, ING surveys, and T&E’s analysis. The criteria include ticket prices (25%), special fares and reductions (15%), reliability (15%), booking experience (15%), compensation policies (10%), traveller experience (10%), night train development (5%), and cycling policies (5%).
The analysis could have included additional criteria such as train frequency, geographic coverage, and accessibility for people with disabilities. However, these factors were not included due to challenges in isolating data for specific operators rather than the network as a whole. The lack of available data on accessibility is a clear indication that more needs to be done in this area. Although not exhaustive, the eight criteria provide a well-rounded assessment of European rail services, offering insights into both the top-performing and underperforming operators.
As Europe moves towards more integrated and sustainable transport solutions, addressing the disparities in rail service quality and pricing will be crucial for encouraging a modal shift from air to rail.
