Transforma Insights recently published the fifth iteration of our annual Communications Service Provider IoT Peer Benchmarking report based on extensive discussions with 27 leading global providers of cellular connectivity and detailed analysis of their capabilities and strategies. As a result of the extensive analysis , as well as the ongoing research that we do on technical and commercial best practice in all aspects of cellular-based IoT connectivity, we are able to draw a set of conclusions about how the IoT connectivity market, and specifically that related to cellular connectivity, has evolved since the last report was published in July 2024. The report identifies a granular set of 24 key themes. This blog post explores all of those themes.
The wait for the SGP.32 ‘IoT’ standard for remote SIM provisioning is finally (just about) over. Discussions with both MNOs and MVNOs consistently included consideration of the impact of its arrival and the changing market dynamics that resulted from that change.
The general consensus is that enterprises will demand the use of SGP.32, and Transforma Insights’ experience with enterprise adopters is that they are surprisingly aware of what is quite a niche technological development. As a result, support for the new standard is not optional.
The impact is quite far-reaching, as discussed in several of the further trends noted below. At the highest level it means a lot more localisation of connectivity, including bring-your-own-connectivity, as an alternative to roaming. And it triggers a number of changes of approach from both MNOs and MVNOs to how they address the market.
But we should note that roaming and wholesale access should not be written off entirely. They will continue to be the dominant mechanism for supporting multi-country connectivity at least for the medium term. And for many use cases across most geographies it is a perfectly serviceable approach, particularly where the connectivity provider has negotiated appropriate access conditions for permanent roaming.
One of the key trends that we have noted previously is the rise of the eSIM Orchestrator function as a result of SGP.32. Many IoT MVNOs are diving headlong into the space. TEAL, for instance, is a quintessential example, with a business model based on localisation of connections rather than resale. Others such as Eseye, Onomondo, Soracom, and Tata Communications are also pushing strongly in this direction, often based on some unique SGP.32 infrastructure approaches.
Even where the arrival of SGP.32 has not triggered a significant change in approach, such as with emnify, Velos IoT, or Wireless Logic, there is a recognition that it provides a valuable tool for managing the connections, and gives the customer a degree more confidence in their freedom to switch. And the changing dynamics also represent an opportunity as an eSIM bootstrap.
For MNOs, the dynamics are somewhat different. SGP.32 promises more localisation into territory, giving potentially greater relevance and control. But perspectives differ. For smaller MNOs, and particularly single country operators, the focus is on being the recipient of incoming localisation. For operators such as Ooredoo, and many others, there is a great incentive to be as proactive as possible on working with SGP.32. For global operators groups there is rather more hesitation, perceiving SGP.32 as a mechanism by which they lose some control over their customers. As such they are more hesitant about making eSIM profiles available to third parties, potentially to be used just as back-up profiles. However, we do note a recognition amongst all MNOs that it will be necessary to support the technology.
The last year has seen increasing pursuit of collaboration between MNOs and other third parties to support multi-country coverage. In part this is driven by a shift by some to be more domestic focused and in part also by a desire to exercise a greater degree of control in an SGP.32 world. Deutsche Telekom has been actively involved in building roaming partnerships with GSIM and working closely with the Bridge Alliance, Verizon has continued to expand the scale and scope of its Global IoT Orchestration offering, and Vodafone has been scouting out further partnerships. Another eye-catching announcement this year was AT&T’s tie up with Eseye for its Global SIM Advanced offering.
Transforma Insights has noted in other reports that SGP.32 is not a silver bullet that resolves all of the issues of providing cellular-based IoT connectivity. Any connectivity provider needs to provide a range of other functionality that wraps around the standard (and is applicable for other approaches), including compliance, network selection, and acting as a single point of contact for commercial and operational factors.
As a technology it also focuses attention on delivering robust and resilient connectivity. An indirect consequence of SGP.32 is likely to be that it punishes companies that are not delivering a good enough service. Reduced lock-in and more footloose customers means less acceptance of sub-par support, driving a need amongst all providers to tighten up SLAs and add resilience for platforms, connectivity, and other elements of the proposition.
At least partly driven by the increasing need to support connections that are hosted on multiple networks and Connectivity Management Platforms (CMPs) – rather than via roaming – many MNOs are investing in deploying a single-pane-of-glass (SPOG) functionality. Several MNOs now have in place their own SPOG functionality, including two prominent partnerships with Simetric (AT&T and Vodafone) as well as in-house equivalents such as DT IoT’s IoT Hub. From the MVNO side, most already effectively act as an SPOG. TEAL, for instance, effectively is an SPOG, with connections managed on operator networks and cores.
On a related note, we also see increasing use of the SPOG as an intermediate layer in the middleware stack which effectively acts as a customer interaction layer, sitting above the CMP, removing the need for customers to interact directly with the (often third party) CMP. User interaction, be it APIs or dashboards, are increasingly managed through that layer.
The approach of MNOs to Connectivity Management Platforms (CMPs) has always been defined by build vs buy. It has been well documented that some MNOs have developed their own platforms (e.g. Telefónica with Kite, Verizon with ThingSpace, and Vodafone with GDSP). Others have used those of a third party (overwhelmingly Cisco Control Center or Aeris IoT Accelerator). There has always been a question mark over two aspects: control of roadmap and economics, i.e. would a self-built platform be cost effective compared to licensing from a third party and would the control of the roadmap for the platform compensate for losing the benefit of a third-party CMP spreading development costs (and hopefully accelerated feature roll-out) across multiple operators. The last few years has seen the introduction of in-house developed CMPs from the likes of DT IoT and Telefónica. The latter has been adding new connections exclusively to KITE since 2019. AT&T joined that group this year, with the launch of AT&T Connection Manager (alongside Control Center), which is aimed at providing a lower support cost (albeit with reduced functionality) than its connections on Control Center. There has also been a regulatory angle to this, with some MNOs concerned about requirements for local management of connections, which might conflict with the architecture of some CMPs.
What has generally not been the case is significant numbers of major MNOs choosing to migrate to alternative third-party CMPs, despite flirting with the idea over the last 3-4 years. For the larger MNOs, the prevailing choice is between in-house and Cisco or Aeris, often on the basis of the reliability of those partners. Although, we should note, that AT&T made a strategic decision to work with Eseye, although that relationship goes beyond licensing a CMP.
What is clear is that the providers of third-party CMPs need to up their game with additional feature sets, particularly we think related to tiered offerings, orchestration of global connectivity (i.e. eSIM Orchestration and SPOG-style functionality) and compliance. Otherwise, they will find themselves increasingly the subject of tough negotiations from MNO customers on price when it comes to contract renewal. We have seen some evidence that MNOs have seen some success in negotiating on price.
Beyond the CMP, there is an increasingly large and diverse set of approaches to other aspects of middleware. The use of SIM-based or device-based agents for device health and network monitoring, for instance from Eseye and Vodafone, was noted last year and continues to be a valuable function. Additionally, and often in relation to the support for managed gateways and associated sensors, there is a growing support for sensor data management, for instance Telefónica’s Asset Control, Verizon’s Sensor Insights and Semtech’s Smart Sensing. Beyond this, some CSPs are building capabilities to manage IoT application data more broadly, for instance Telia’s new low-code/no-code platform, as well as more established application enablement platform and data analytics plays such as Wireless Logic’s Kheiron IoT Suite.
We note increasing focus from connectivity providers in ensuring their own propositions are more compliant as well as supporting customer compliance with the growing amount of regulation related to IoT. The issue of permanent roaming continues to be a challenge, with new and evolving rules, as well as new rules related to eSIM. The use of remote SIM provisioning as well as increasing focus on building collaborations with local operator (and MVNO) partners in ‘difficult’ countries means that this is becoming less of an issue. However, the landscape continues to change and there is more consideration of other regulatory issues related to IoT for instance related to Know Your Customer (KYC) rules – for which Tata Communications has a specific feature – and data sovereignty, for instance as addressed by NTT’s Sovereign Ready function.
The word to describe approaches to deployments and support for low power cellular technologies (e.g. NB-IoT, LTE-M and RedCap) developed specifically to support IoT is ‘fragmented’.
Most MNOs are seeing only limited growth in NB-IoT, although with some notable exceptions where they have won smart meter contracts or other large projects (such as the smart beacons project in Spain ). MVNOs have generally no interest in NB-IoT. It has largely become an MNO-centric technology for addressing specific national projects – and doing so very well – rather than an option for multi-country deployments. AT&T’s decision to switch-off its NB-IoT network has not been followed by other operators explicitly, although we detect signs of ‘quiet quitting’ whereby MNOs maintain networks but with very little push. One exception is Verizon which is actively promoting its long-term support for the technology in contrast to its main rival. However, we see this as more a tactical move reflecting AT&T’s departure, rather than symptomatic of a wider trend.
LTE-M is much more popular and more widely supported, but its much-touted longevity (i.e. that it will continue to be supported on 5G core networks) is coming into question, with some operators admitting that they do not plan to provide such long-term support. Consider also that LTE Cat 1bis is seeing greater support, thanks to the broader availability of networks to support it, albeit with inferior ‘low power wide area’ capabilities compared to LTE-M and particularly NB-IoT.
And on a similar note, 5G RedCap is not riding to the rescue. It doesn’t have the key characteristics demanded of the LPWA technologies, i.e. power consumption is not particularly good and prices are high. And, in terms of network rollout the situation is currently even more fragmented than with LTE-M/NB-IoT, being dependent on the arrival of 5G Standalone (see below). US operators, however, with one eye on potential LTE switch-off and with a competitive landscape very much geared towards competing on 5G SA, are more forward thinking, particularly AT&T. eRedCap and further iterations hold more promise generally.
At the end of 2024, Transforma Insights published a report ('Monetisation of public 5G networks through IoT') looking at the current state and prognosis for the use of 5G to address IoT. The conclusion of that report was that the additional rich features of 5G would be of only limited use in building new IoT revenue streams, even if there is a general shift of connections (and therefore revenue) to 5G.
However, the perspectives of some MNOs (much less so the MVNOs which always work on n-1 generation technologies ) is that there is value in exploring the opportunities associated with network slicing, quality-on-demand and so forth. Initiatives such as Telia’s NorthStar, Telenor’s 5G test lab, Singtel Paragon and various operators working on API exposure are indicative of increasing interest, mostly aimed at automotive or emergency services. The biggest hurdle is that most MNOs are still only part way through, if that, their process of upgrading to 5G Standalone, meaning that true 5G functionality is still yet to surface and will require some finessing before it makes any commercial difference.
On a related note, and at risk of labouring the theme of SGP.32 further, there is – or will be – an added impetus for eSIM localisation to take advantage of 5G SA features given that 5G SA roaming is limited and the ability to orchestrate across different operator networks for network slices is generally non-existent, meaning that to take advantage of 5G SA functions it’s necessary to have the connection managed on the local core.
There has been, again, a flurry of activity related to Release 17 Non-Terrestrial Networks. By ‘activity’ we mean the striking of partnership agreements rather than sales and deployments. The hardware ecosystem is not yet mature enough to support that. Our view is that this is an opportunity for selling an additional value-added feature for cellular connections (i.e. global fall-back) . But there’s quite a lot of bleeding edge development to go through yet, a relatively slow sales process, and potentially disruptive alternative offers from established and new satellite vendors. Several CSPs are adopting a ‘wait-and-see’ approach. That’s fine.
The CSPs covered in this report are almost universally ramping up – albeit often quite slowly – their globally deployed network infrastructure, with redundant core networks, distributed packet gateways and so forth. In part, this is a reflection of the regulatory requirements for local data management, and in part is a mechanism for better supporting lower latency. Perspectives vary amongst the CSPs on which is the most important, but both are relevant.
Who doesn’t want to sell more? It’s nothing new for CSPs to work with third party resellers and other channels. We have noted a slight uptick in that trend in the last twelve months, for instance with NTT and KORE announcing new arrangements with TD SYNNEX, and Soracom with Intelisys. We’ve also seen some instances where CSPs are making adaptations to their platform functionality to support additional reseller tiers. To support these reseller arrangements, several CSPs already have quite sophisticated partner programmes, such as AT&T and Proximus Global, whereas others still have room to build them.
Most of the CSPs covered in this report note that almost all sales are consultative in nature, as discussed below. As a result, digital sales channels continue to account for only a very modest part of the market.
The perennial discussion with CSPs is over how they head off the challenge of price erosion for the core connectivity product. The next few trends consider some of the mechanisms used for differentiation and upselling.
One major approach relates to professional services. This can span a wide range of capabilities from heavy consulting through to enhanced pre-sales/post-sales support. Telefónica, for instance, provides a wide range of vertical-specific services; for instance its Geprom acquisition provides an extensive range of consultancy and integration services in the industrial segment. For AT&T, it’s a broader set of ‘white glove’ services related to the connectivity itself. For Eseye, it’s more related to optimising the device with the connectivity. In some cases it’s focused on making labs available for testing, e.g. Telefónica and Telenor.
The big question, of course, is the extent to which this is chargeable directly versus being a differentiator. We see pure consulting as a chargeable service. For the lower tier support, revenue and differentiation are inextricably linked. While these services may not be explicitly charged, they are typically used as a way to stave off price erosion.
Another hoped-for revenue source is value-added services. There are many cases of CSPs providing repositories of additional VAS, particularly related to security. We are not aware of any that have really ‘moved the needle’ in terms of generating substantial additional revenue.
One possible opportunity presents itself, however. The awareness around AI is now such that providing a portfolio of AI enhancements e.g. for network optimisation, report analysis, or anomaly detection, seems to us to be an opportunity.
On the subject of differentiation, raised earlier, we see a greater opportunity for a broader differentiation based on counterparty risk, i.e. is this a reliable partner to whom I can entrust my critical connectivity requirements for the next decade. The ability to support security and compliance are somewhat nebulous and are less based on identifying a critical feature set and more on persuading the buyer that the provider is a safe pair of hands. And, similarly, that it is profitable and stable and not dependent on endless rounds of PE funding and therefore likely to be around for the duration. To harness a potent current ICT theme, this is ‘vibes-based’ differentiation.
Another mechanism that has always been considered by CSPs for moving beyond connectivity is pursuing end-to-end solutions. While some continue to pursue this strategy, for instance Ooredoo, Telefónica, Telia and Verizon, it is not the favoured approach. Correctly so, as it generally involves having a strong right-to-play in the vertical often against a large number of established competitors. Certainly some CSPs – included those named – have built themselves a right-to-play in a small handful of cases, but generally it’s a strategy to be avoided.
However, what is interesting is the pivot by many to develop more horizontal full-stack solutions (if that isn’t a contradiction in terms). One example is managed gateways with a range of sensor devices (typically using LoRaWAN) that could be applied to multiple use cases. Examples of these types of propositions include AT&T Connected Spaces, Semtech’s Smart Sensing, and KORE’s OmniHub and Pre-Configured Solutions. The provision of such propositions also necessitates additional features to manage sensors, such as discussed in Section 3.8. Also in a similar vein, we see more propositions spanning connectivity and hardware delivered as an integrated package such as Telenor Complete. Video-based propositions also fit this categorisation (as discussed below).
One specific form of horizontal full-stack solutions that have seen significant focus recently relate to video analytics. We have explored such a trend in reports such as 'AI-enabled IoT video analytics: functions and architecture' and 'AI-enabled IoT video analytics: market landscape' (both September 2025).
A variety of CSP propositions, including AT&T IoT Video Intelligence, Verizon 5G Video Insights, and Soracom Flux and SoraCam, are now focused on supporting multiple use cases and verticals with AI-enabled video cameras. There has also been quite a lot of focus on optimising how those types of solutions are delivered, for instance with several CSPs working with Digital Barriers to optimise bandwidth consumption from video use cases, and development of edge compute propositions as the most appropriate mechanism for supporting the deployment of video analytics, particularly in brownfield sites, for instance NTT’s Spektra Edge offering.
The automotive sector has always been the single most significant sector for cellular-based IoT connectivity. According to the Transforma Insights IoT Forecast Database, globally one-third of cellular IoT connectivity revenue comes from the automotive sector, a figure which rises to 44% in Europe and 47% in North America. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that the focus of many CSPs is on how to best address this part of the IoT connectivity opportunity. Historically major MNOs, most notably AT&T, DT IoT, and Vodafone, have dominated. However, we note an increasing trend amongst some other CSPs to more actively pursue this space, notably NTT, Singtel, Tata, Tele2 and Wireless Logic. In particular they are often pursuing the Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers. At the same time there is also a cadre of CSPs, mostly MVNOs, that are specifically not pursuing this space, conscious of the challenging margins and demanding requirements of auto OEMs.
Another trend that has become somewhat more pronounced in the last year is for CSPs to pursue more opportunities outside of IoT. Of course there’s no requirement to only pursue use cases that might nominally be considered as ‘IoT’ and many of the highly streamlined processes and sophisticated management tools (including eSIM management) developed to address IoT are highly useful for other adjacent fields. One example is branch connectivity, which overlaps a lot with what might be considered fixed wireless access (FWA), as a competitor to traditional broadband offerings. NTT, for instance, has its Rapid Start Flexible Wireless Access, and Wireless Logic is very active in the space, particularly following the acquisition of Blue Wireless. The managed gateway propositions discussed above are also very similar.
Another diversification relates to the management of devices that might more usually be considered in the realm of traditional enterprise mobility services, such as emnify’s wins relating to managed tablets, or Soracom’s take-over of Marubeni’s non-IoT MVNO business. We might also consider here things like the provision of passenger Wi-Fi on trains, as addressed by Pelion, amongst others. Many, if not most, of these use cases aren’t really IoT, based on a strict definition, but that’s irrelevant really assuming they are addressable based on the functionality available to the CSPs. And, equally importantly, they have the added advantage of having average revenue per connection that is far beyond what is seen with much of IoT.
See the report 'Beyond traditional IoT: emerging adjacent opportunities for IoT CSPs' (November, 2025) for more examination of this topic.
It is impossible to ignore the use of AI. For the last iteration of this report we asked the CSPs how they were using AI and the answers tended strongly towards relatively mundane use cases, such as invoice processing. The findings were discussed in the report 'How are MNOs and MVNOs harnessing AI for their IoT operations?' This year, things have moved on in leaps and bounds. We see much more use for customer support and platform interaction, for instance from emnify and Telefónica. We have also seen some interesting approaches to feeding AI, such as Telia adopting an application enablement strategy specifically geared towards integrating IoT data into AI applications.
Specifically we are also seeing a lot of focus on using AI for monitoring of device and connection behaviour. Good examples include AT&T’s Network Intelligence, Telenor Connexion’s Analytics & Insights, and Proximus Global’s SMART Analytics. One thing we should note is that in AI the biggest model tends to deliver the best results. Therefore, for more established players it’s missing a trick to not harness a goldmine of time-series data in order to optimise the proposition, something which has been particularly noted by Telenor Connexion for the Analytics & Insights offering.
The final, and least exciting, of the mechanisms being used by the CSPs profiled to cope with declining connectivity revenue per connection is automation, i.e. introducing more streamlining of workflows and processes. emnify, Pelion, Telefónica and Vodafone are amongst those that have focused a lot on this aspect in the last year. We can also highlight AT&T’s IoT Marketplace as an automated approach, relevant here less for it being a channel and more for the integration of the product catalogue, ordering, fulfilment, API integration and more.
The full 161-page report is available to subscribers to Transforma Insights' Advisory Service. If you would be interested in subscribing or buying the full report please contact us.
Or there is a recording available of a webinar we delivered on 25th November which explores all of these themes as well as other aspects of the CSP Benchmarking research. The replay is available here: Webinar - IoT Communications Service Provider (CSP) strategies and landscape.
