Sugar Land, Texas: internet providers, fiber and choice
Fiber is available at 96.6% of the 37,127 homes and businesses the FCC counts in Sugar Land, and wired broadband of at least 100/20 Mbps at 99.8%. 96.9% of locations have a choice of two or more wired providers at that speed; at 2.9% there is only one.1
FCC National Broadband Map, availability as of June 30, 2026 (data revised November 10, 2026), as reported by providers.
Sugar Land in Texas
In June 2022, DSL over copper phone lines was reported at 93.0% of Sugar Land's homes and businesses and fiber at 24.6%2. By June 30, 2026, fiber reached 96.6%1, most of it reported by four companies, while Xfinity's cable network still covers almost every address.
Xfinity cable and four fiber companies
Xfinity is the one network present nearly everywhere: it reports cable service at 99.6% of Sugar Land's 37,127 homes and businesses, with downloads advertised up to 2 Gbps. Fiber is split among four companies with large footprints. Ezee Fiber reports fiber at 77.0% of locations, Kinetic at 38.4%, AT&T at 30.2% and Astound at 9.8%1. Hotwire Communications and Logix report fiber at a few dozen addresses each.
| Xfinity | Fiber Cable | 99.6% | 99.6% | 2 Gbps | 2.8% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-Mobile | Licensed wireless | 91.2% | 38.2% | 100 Mbps | – |
| Verizon | Licensed wireless | 89.1% | 39.5% | 1 Gbps | – |
| Ezee Fiber | Fiber | 77.0% | 77.0% | 8 Gbps | 0.0% |
| Kinetic | Fiber DSL | 64.1% | 43.8% | 2 Gbps | 0.1% |
| AT&T | Fiber DSL Licensed wireless | 52.9% | 33.6% | 5 Gbps | 0.0% |
| Astound | Fiber Cable | 9.8% | 9.8% | 1.5 Gbps | 0.1% |
| Hotwire Communications | Fiber | 0.2% | 0.2% | 8 Gbps | – |
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. Share of the area's broadband serviceable locations where the provider reports service as of June 30, 2026. "Only wired option" is the share of locations where it is the single wired provider at 100/20 Mbps. Provider-reported and challengeable; speeds are advertised maximums, not measured; no prices. Satellite providers (Viasat, Starlink, HughesNet) report service at nearly every location and are left out of the table.
All of these come from the providers' own filings with the FCC, as of June 30, 2026 (revision of November 10, 2026), for locations inside Sugar Land's city limits as drawn for the 2020 Census. A provider counts as available where it says it could install standard service within ten business days; filings can be challenged on the FCC map. The table counts where a company reports service, not where it has customers.
What a single address can choose from
For someone comparing addresses, the useful count is how many wired providers offer at least 100/20 Mbps at the same location. In Sugar Land, 96.9% of locations have two or more (10th highest among large cities), against 66.2% across Texas. 54.3%1 have three or more, up from 8.9%2 in 2022.
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. Different wired providers (fiber, cable or DSL; FCC provider IDs) reporting 100 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up or more at the same location. Fixed wireless and satellite are not counted.
Show the numbers
| Area | None | One | Two | Three or more |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sugar Land | 0.2% | 2.9% | 42.6% | 54.3% |
| Texas | 9.6% | 24.2% | 48.8% | 17.4% |
| United States | 7.8% | 36.6% | 44.6% | 11.1% |
In June 2022, 49.6%2 of locations had exactly one wired provider at that speed. Now 2.9% do (up from 2.4%3 on December 31, 2025), against 24.2% statewide; Xfinity is the sole wired 100/20 option at 2.8%. Only 64 locations have no wired provider at 100/20 Mbps, and 101 have satellite as their only option.
Fiber's rise since 2022
Few large cities changed as much on the FCC map. Fiber was reported at 24.6%2 of Sugar Land's locations in June 2022 and at 96.6% in June 2026, a rise of 72.0 percentage points and the 15th highest increase among the 343 US cities of 100,000 or more. Ezee Fiber accounts for much of it: it reported only a handful of Sugar Land locations in 2022 and now reports 28,5841. AT&T's reported footprint in the city also grew over the same years.
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2022; FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of December 31, 2025; FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. Shares of broadband serviceable locations in each FCC release (latest revision of each); the small number is the change in percentage points since June 30, 2022. The FCC's count of locations is updated with each release, so shares are compared rather than counts.
Show the numbers
| Measure | June 30, 2022 | December 31, 2025 | June 30, 2026 | Change (points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiber available | 24.6% | 96.6% | 96.6% | 71.9 pts |
| DSL available | 93.0% | 54.8% | 32.5% | −60.5 pts |
| Two or more fiber networks | 9.0% | 40.2% | 51.9% | 42.9 pts |
New Bedford, Massachusetts 0.0%Clarksville, Tennessee 100.0%
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. Each dot is a city. FCC file revision of November 10, 2026. Shares are of broadband serviceable locations (homes and businesses), not people.
Show the numbers
| Area | Fiber available |
|---|---|
| Chattanooga, Tennessee | 100.0% |
| Clarksville, Tennessee | 100.0% |
| Lincoln, Nebraska | 99.9% |
| Simi Valley, California | 99.9% |
| Longmont, Colorado | 99.9% |
| Overland Park, Kansas | 99.3% |
| Knoxville, Tennessee | 99.0% |
| Olathe, Kansas | 98.1% |
| Amarillo, Texas | 98.0% |
| Greeley, Colorado | 97.6% |
| Kansas City, Missouri | 97.4% |
| Abilene, Texas | 97.2% |
| Rio Rancho, New Mexico | 97.0% |
| Bridgeport, Connecticut | 96.8% |
| Sugar Land, Texas | 96.6% |
| Yonkers, New York | 96.3% |
| Independence, Missouri | 96.2% |
| Wichita Falls, Texas | 95.8% |
| Lee's Summit, Missouri | 95.8% |
| Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | 95.7% |
| Elizabeth, New Jersey | 95.4% |
| Miami Gardens, Florida | 95.4% |
| Cary, North Carolina | 95.1% |
| Lynn, Massachusetts | 95.0% |
| Palm Coast, Florida | 94.8% |
| Paterson, New Jersey | 94.7% |
| Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania | 94.7% |
| Davenport, Iowa | 94.3% |
| Kansas City, Kansas | 94.2% |
| Conroe, Texas | 94.1% |
| Cape Coral, Florida | 94.0% |
| San Angelo, Texas | 94.0% |
| Pearland, Texas | 93.9% |
| Menifee, California | 93.8% |
| Newark, New Jersey | 93.7% |
| Des Moines, Iowa | 93.6% |
| Frisco, Texas | 93.5% |
| Stamford, Connecticut | 93.5% |
| Round Rock, Texas | 93.3% |
| Springfield, Missouri | 93.0% |
| Newport News, Virginia | 92.9% |
| West Valley City, Utah | 92.9% |
| Huntsville, Alabama | 92.8% |
| Columbia, Missouri | 92.6% |
| Temecula, California | 92.6% |
| Fishers, Indiana | 92.5% |
| Murrieta, California | 92.3% |
| Killeen, Texas | 92.3% |
| Lubbock, Texas | 92.2% |
| Minneapolis, Minnesota | 92.0% |
| Berkeley, California | 91.6% |
| Lexington, Kentucky | 91.6% |
| St. Paul, Minnesota | 91.6% |
| Garland, Texas | 91.6% |
| Lafayette, Louisiana | 91.6% |
| Raleigh, North Carolina | 91.5% |
| Mesquite, Texas | 91.5% |
| High Point, North Carolina | 91.2% |
| Providence, Rhode Island | 91.1% |
| Jersey City, New Jersey | 91.1% |
| Richmond, Virginia | 91.0% |
| Allen, Texas | 91.0% |
| Hillsboro, Oregon | 91.0% |
| Yuma, Arizona | 90.9% |
| Plano, Texas | 90.7% |
| New York, New York | 90.3% |
| Carrollton, Texas | 90.3% |
| Wichita, Kansas | 90.3% |
| Brockton, Massachusetts | 90.1% |
| Oakland, California | 90.1% |
| Cincinnati, Ohio | 90.1% |
| Rochester, Minnesota | 90.1% |
| Honolulu, Hawaii | 90.0% |
| Salt Lake City, Utah | 89.8% |
| Tyler, Texas | 89.8% |
| Norman, Oklahoma | 89.7% |
| Norfolk, Virginia | 89.6% |
| Durham, North Carolina | 89.5% |
| South Fulton, Georgia | 89.5% |
| McKinney, Texas | 89.4% |
| League City, Texas | 89.4% |
| Carmel, Indiana | 89.3% |
| Richardson, Texas | 89.2% |
| West Jordan, Utah | 88.8% |
| Fort Wayne, Indiana | 88.8% |
| Concord, North Carolina | 88.7% |
| Allentown, Pennsylvania | 88.7% |
| Louisville, Kentucky | 88.6% |
| San Mateo, California | 88.3% |
| Buckeye, Arizona | 88.3% |
| Omaha, Nebraska | 88.2% |
| Chesapeake, Virginia | 88.2% |
| San Antonio, Texas | 88.2% |
| Tampa, Florida | 87.9% |
| Broken Arrow, Oklahoma | 87.9% |
| Fayetteville, North Carolina | 87.8% |
| Provo, Utah | 87.6% |
| Lansing, Michigan | 87.6% |
| Arlington, Texas | 87.4% |
| Washington, District of Columbia | 87.4% |
| Surprise, Arizona | 87.4% |
| Grand Prairie, Texas | 87.4% |
| Boston, Massachusetts | 87.3% |
| New Haven, Connecticut | 87.2% |
| Pembroke Pines, Florida | 87.2% |
| Murfreesboro, Tennessee | 87.1% |
| Hesperia, California | 87.1% |
| Miramar, Florida | 86.8% |
| Centennial, Colorado | 86.8% |
| Nashville, Tennessee | 86.6% |
| Downey, California | 86.2% |
| Manchester, New Hampshire | 86.1% |
| Fort Worth, Texas | 86.0% |
| Pueblo, Colorado | 85.0% |
| Virginia Beach, Virginia | 84.8% |
| Fayetteville, Arkansas | 84.8% |
| Pasadena, Texas | 84.6% |
| Dallas, Texas | 84.4% |
| Waterbury, Connecticut | 84.3% |
| Hialeah, Florida | 83.9% |
| Topeka, Kansas | 83.8% |
| Charlotte, North Carolina | 83.6% |
| Long Beach, California | 83.6% |
| Fort Collins, Colorado | 83.5% |
| Everett, Washington | 83.0% |
| Thousand Oaks, California | 83.0% |
| Irving, Texas | 82.8% |
| Midland, Texas | 82.8% |
| Lancaster, California | 82.5% |
| Alexandria, Virginia | 82.4% |
| Austin, Texas | 82.4% |
| Port St. Lucie, Florida | 82.1% |
| Victorville, California | 82.0% |
| Houston, Texas | 81.9% |
| Ontario, California | 81.9% |
| Greensboro, North Carolina | 81.8% |
| Grand Rapids, Michigan | 81.6% |
| Pomona, California | 81.4% |
| Oklahoma City, Oklahoma | 81.1% |
| Coral Springs, Florida | 80.9% |
| West Covina, California | 80.7% |
| Gresham, Oregon | 80.7% |
| Lowell, Massachusetts | 80.3% |
| Odessa, Texas | 80.0% |
| Seattle, Washington | 79.9% |
| Portland, Oregon | 79.5% |
| Mobile, Alabama | 79.3% |
| Goodyear, Arizona | 79.2% |
| Baton Rouge, Louisiana | 78.2% |
| Richmond, California | 78.2% |
| Atlanta, Georgia | 78.1% |
| Corpus Christi, Texas | 78.1% |
| Tallahassee, Florida | 78.0% |
| Peoria, Illinois | 77.8% |
| Denton, Texas | 77.5% |
| Hollywood, Florida | 77.0% |
| Denver, Colorado | 76.9% |
| Daly City, California | 76.9% |
| Spokane, Washington | 76.9% |
| Miami, Florida | 76.8% |
| Fullerton, California | 76.8% |
| Deltona, Florida | 76.4% |
| Lewisville, Texas | 75.9% |
| Tuscaloosa, Alabama | 75.8% |
| Little Rock, Arkansas | 75.2% |
| Meridian, Idaho | 75.1% |
| Hartford, Connecticut | 74.9% |
| Suffolk, Virginia | 74.9% |
| Indianapolis, Indiana | 74.8% |
| Westminster, Colorado | 74.8% |
| Green Bay, Wisconsin | 74.4% |
| Colorado Springs, Colorado | 74.0% |
| Nampa, Idaho | 74.0% |
| Sandy Springs, Georgia | 73.7% |
| Jacksonville, Florida | 73.3% |
| Tulsa, Oklahoma | 73.3% |
| Chula Vista, California | 72.5% |
| Lakewood, Colorado | 72.1% |
| Madison, Wisconsin | 71.6% |
| Edmond, Oklahoma | 71.5% |
| New Braunfels, Texas | 71.3% |
| Elk Grove, California | 70.9% |
| Hampton, Virginia | 70.8% |
| Columbia, South Carolina | 70.4% |
| Moreno Valley, California | 70.0% |
| Huntington Beach, California | 69.9% |
| St. Petersburg, Florida | 69.9% |
| Syracuse, New York | 69.7% |
| Orlando, Florida | 69.7% |
| Milwaukee, Wisconsin | 69.5% |
| Waco, Texas | 69.2% |
| Brownsville, Texas | 69.2% |
| South Bend, Indiana | 69.1% |
| San Bernardino, California | 69.0% |
| Wilmington, North Carolina | 68.9% |
| Fort Lauderdale, Florida | 68.5% |
| West Palm Beach, Florida | 67.6% |
| Torrance, California | 67.3% |
| Winston-Salem, North Carolina | 67.2% |
| Santa Maria, California | 67.0% |
| Garden Grove, California | 66.2% |
| Beaumont, Texas | 65.6% |
| Laredo, Texas | 65.2% |
| Hayward, California | 65.1% |
| St. Louis, Missouri | 65.1% |
| St. George, Utah | 64.5% |
| Evansville, Indiana | 63.6% |
| Gainesville, Florida | 62.9% |
| Lakeland, Florida | 62.9% |
| Davie, Florida | 62.7% |
| Springfield, Illinois | 62.6% |
| Sparks, Nevada | 62.6% |
| Palm Bay, Florida | 62.6% |
| Shreveport, Louisiana | 62.5% |
| Savannah, Georgia | 62.2% |
| Memphis, Tennessee | 62.1% |
| Dayton, Ohio | 61.8% |
| Boca Raton, Florida | 61.5% |
| Pompano Beach, Florida | 61.4% |
| Columbus, Georgia | 61.3% |
| Roseville, California | 61.1% |
| Oxnard, California | 61.0% |
| San Francisco, California | 60.8% |
| Peoria, Arizona | 60.8% |
| Montgomery, Alabama | 60.7% |
| Sacramento, California | 60.1% |
| El Paso, Texas | 60.0% |
| Buffalo, New York | 59.9% |
| Rockford, Illinois | 58.7% |
| Edinburg, Texas | 58.6% |
| Mesa, Arizona | 58.6% |
| College Station, Texas | 58.3% |
| Athens, Georgia | 57.1% |
| Clearwater, Florida | 57.0% |
| New Orleans, Louisiana | 56.9% |
| Cleveland, Ohio | 56.1% |
| Charleston, South Carolina | 55.4% |
| Sioux Falls, South Dakota | 55.1% |
| Akron, Ohio | 55.1% |
| Fort Myers, Florida | 55.0% |
| Thornton, Colorado | 55.0% |
| Reno, Nevada | 54.0% |
| Birmingham, Alabama | 53.5% |
| Rochester, New York | 53.3% |
| Scottsdale, Arizona | 53.2% |
| Santa Ana, California | 53.1% |
| Tacoma, Washington | 53.1% |
| Toledo, Ohio | 52.8% |
| Ann Arbor, Michigan | 52.7% |
| Inglewood, California | 52.4% |
| Irvine, California | 52.3% |
| Aurora, Colorado | 52.2% |
| Los Angeles, California | 51.9% |
| Burbank, California | 51.8% |
| Santa Clara, California | 51.7% |
| Glendale, Arizona | 50.9% |
| Jackson, Mississippi | 50.3% |
| Arvada, Colorado | 50.2% |
| Warren, Michigan | 49.8% |
| Sunnyvale, California | 49.7% |
| Macon, Georgia | 49.3% |
| Eugene, Oregon | 49.0% |
| Costa Mesa, California | 47.7% |
| Boulder, Colorado | 45.2% |
| Henderson, Nevada | 44.9% |
| Pasadena, California | 44.8% |
| Las Vegas, Nevada | 44.8% |
| San Diego, California | 44.6% |
| Billings, Montana | 44.3% |
| North Las Vegas, Nevada | 44.1% |
| San Jose, California | 43.9% |
| McAllen, Texas | 43.7% |
| El Cajon, California | 43.6% |
| North Charleston, South Carolina | 43.2% |
| Vancouver, Washington | 42.9% |
| Vallejo, California | 42.9% |
| Chandler, Arizona | 41.1% |
| Springfield, Massachusetts | 41.1% |
| Aurora, Illinois | 41.1% |
| Dearborn, Michigan | 40.8% |
| Columbus, Ohio | 40.4% |
| Fresno, California | 39.6% |
| Glendale, California | 39.5% |
| Georgetown, Texas | 38.5% |
| Gilbert, Arizona | 38.4% |
| Riverside, California | 38.3% |
| Fremont, California | 38.2% |
| Antioch, California | 37.7% |
| Stockton, California | 37.2% |
| Concord, California | 37.0% |
| Avondale, Arizona | 37.0% |
| Palmdale, California | 36.9% |
| Chicago, Illinois | 36.6% |
| Boise, Idaho | 36.1% |
| Anaheim, California | 36.0% |
| Carlsbad, California | 36.0% |
| Las Cruces, New Mexico | 36.0% |
| Bakersfield, California | 35.5% |
| Santa Rosa, California | 35.5% |
| Worcester, Massachusetts | 35.3% |
| Cedar Rapids, Iowa | 35.2% |
| Bend, Oregon | 35.2% |
| Clovis, California | 34.9% |
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | 34.0% |
| Tucson, Arizona | 34.0% |
| Augusta, Georgia | 34.0% |
| El Monte, California | 33.8% |
| Phoenix, Arizona | 31.4% |
| Salinas, California | 31.2% |
| Chico, California | 30.7% |
| Fontana, California | 30.5% |
| Modesto, California | 29.7% |
| Orange, California | 28.7% |
| Joliet, Illinois | 27.8% |
| Jurupa Valley, California | 27.8% |
| Detroit, Michigan | 27.4% |
| Bellevue, Washington | 27.4% |
| Visalia, California | 27.3% |
| Elgin, Illinois | 27.3% |
| Salem, Oregon | 26.9% |
| Oceanside, California | 26.7% |
| Tracy, California | 24.2% |
| Ventura, California | 23.8% |
| Fargo, North Dakota | 22.6% |
| Tempe, Arizona | 22.3% |
| Sterling Heights, Michigan | 22.0% |
| Fairfield, California | 21.8% |
| Rancho Cucamonga, California | 21.7% |
| Rialto, California | 20.7% |
| Spokane Valley, Washington | 20.6% |
| Vacaville, California | 18.6% |
| Santa Clarita, California | 18.3% |
| Naperville, Illinois | 18.0% |
| Baltimore, Maryland | 16.7% |
| Kent, Washington | 15.9% |
| Escondido, California | 15.6% |
| Corona, California | 13.0% |
| Renton, Washington | 10.5% |
| Quincy, Massachusetts | 9.0% |
| Anchorage, Alaska | 6.2% |
| Albany, New York | 2.0% |
| Cambridge, Massachusetts | 0.5% |
| New Bedford, Massachusetts | 0.0% |
The share of locations with two or more fiber networks went from 9.0%2 to 51.9%, the 29th highest share among large cities and more than double the Texas figure of 18.2%. Not every measure moved in the latest release: since December 31, 2025, the fiber share held at 96.6% while the two-network share grew by 11.7 percentage points1. Providers revise their filings between releases, so small shifts in either direction are common.
The copper lines dropping out
The other half of the change is the DSL network. In June 2022, DSL over telephone lines was reported at 93.0%2 of Sugar Land's locations. By December 31, 2025 it was down to 54.8%3, and by June 2026 to 32.5%, a fall of 22.3 percentage points in six months. Over four years the decline was 60.5 percentage points1, among the steepest of any large Texas city.
Most of the DSL still on the map is Kinetic's. Kinetic reports service at 64.1% of locations but offers 100/20 Mbps at 43.8%: where it has fiber it advertises up to 2 Gbps, and elsewhere it reports DSL. AT&T's footprint is a mix as well, with fiber, a small amount of DSL and fixed wireless; it offers 100/20 Mbps at 33.6%1 of locations.
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. Share of broadband serviceable locations where at least one provider reports the technology, at any speed; a location can have several. Satellite is reported almost everywhere and is left out.
Show the numbers
| Technology | Sugar Land | Texas |
|---|---|---|
| Fiber | 96.6% | 74.4% |
| Cable | 99.6% | 77.0% |
| DSL (copper) | 32.5% | 26.7% |
| Licensed fixed wireless (incl. 5G home) | 96.7% | 91.0% |
| Unlicensed fixed wireless | 0.0% | 30.0% |
Multi-gigabit tiers and symmetrical uploads
Four years ago the fastest download advertised at most Sugar Land locations (89.4%) was at least 940 Mbps but under 2 Gbps. Now 95.9% of locations have a top advertised tier of 2 Gbps or more: Ezee Fiber advertises up to 8 Gbps and AT&T up to 5 Gbps. The larger change is in uploads. Wired service of 100/100 Mbps or more went from 24.7%2 of locations to 98.4%1. These are maximums advertised in provider filings, not measured speeds.
5G and LTE home internet
5G home internet is reported almost everywhere, at lower advertised speeds than the wired networks. T-Mobile reports it at 91.2% of locations with downloads advertised up to 100 Mbps, and Verizon at 89.1% with up to 1 Gbps; 100/20 Mbps service is reported at 38.2% and 39.5% of locations respectively. AT&T reports its own fixed wireless service in parts of the city. Carriers limit sign-ups by local network capacity, so availability on the map does not guarantee an opening at every address. Unlicensed fixed wireless, reported at 17.0%2 of locations in 2022, is now reported at 0.0%1.
What households subscribe to
Availability and subscription are measured differently: the FCC counts locations on one date, while the Census Bureau's American Community Survey asks a sample of households about their internet subscriptions. In the Census Bureau's 2020–2024 five-year estimates, 97.5% of Sugar Land's households had a broadband subscription of some kind (margin of error ±0.7 percentage points), 88.6% subscribed to cable, fiber or DSL (±1.5 percentage points) and 2.4% had no internet subscription (±0.7 percentage points4).
The 2025 one-year survey adds two narrower measures. 2.0% of households had a smartphone but no desktop, laptop or tablet (margin of error ±1.5 percentage points), the 4th lowest estimate among large cities, and 0.3%5 had no computer of any kind. With margins that wide, the ranking separates Sugar Land from cities with high smartphone-only shares, not from its nearest neighbors in the list.
Sugar Land beside other Houston-area cities
Fiber is common across the Houston suburbs, but the number of fiber networks differs widely. Conroe has two or more fiber networks at a larger share of locations than Sugar Land, while League City and Pasadena have almost none. In Houston itself, 5.0%1 of locations have two or more fiber networks.
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. FCC file revision of November 10, 2026. Shares are of broadband serviceable locations (homes and businesses), not people.
Show the numbers
| Area | Two or more fiber networks |
|---|---|
| Conroe | 69.4% |
| Sugar Land | 51.9% |
| Pearland | 32.1% |
| Texas | 18.2% |
| United States | 12.1% |
| Houston | 5.0% |
| League City | 0.5% |
| Pasadena | 0.1% |
The comparison below uses the same FCC release for every city and sets Sugar Land beside the US cities closest to it in size.
| Area | Fiber available | Gigabit (1,000/100) | Two or more wired choices | Fiber networks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sugar Land, Texas | 96.6% | 98.4% | 96.9% | 6 |
| Lee's Summit, Missouri | 95.8% | 96.8% | 94.9% | 5 |
| Centennial, Colorado | 86.8% | 99.5% | 89.1% | 4 |
| Downey, California | 86.2% | 86.2% | 85.0% | 4 |
| Georgetown, Texas | 38.5% | 37.4% | 37.1% | 9 |
| Bend, Oregon | 35.2% | 35.1% | 28.0% | 7 |
| Jurupa Valley, California | 27.8% | 27.8% | 31.7% | 3 |
| Spokane Valley, Washington | 20.6% | 86.0% | 27.7% | 5 |
Source: FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026. FCC file revision of November 10, 2026. Shares are of broadband serviceable locations (homes and businesses), not people.
The Texas page maps every county and lists the state's other large cities, among them Houston, Pearland and Conroe.
Sugar Land internet questions
What internet providers are available in Sugar Land, Texas?
Xfinity reports cable service at 99.6% of locations. Ezee Fiber reports fiber at 77.0%, Kinetic at 64.1% (fiber and DSL), AT&T at 52.9% (fiber, DSL and fixed wireless) and Astound at 9.8%1 (fiber). T-Mobile and Verizon report fixed wireless home internet, and three satellite services report the whole city.
Is fiber internet available in Sugar Land?
At 96.6% of the city's homes and businesses at least one provider reports fiber, against 74.4% across Texas and 62.6% nationally. 51.9%1 of locations have two or more fiber networks.
How many internet providers does Sugar Land have?
6 wired providers report service somewhere in the city, 6 of them with fiber. At a single location, 42.6% have exactly two wired providers at 100/20 Mbps and 54.3%1 have three or more.
Is 5G home internet available in Sugar Land?
T-Mobile reports fixed wireless home internet at 91.2% of locations and Verizon at 89.1%. Each offers 100/20 Mbps at fewer than half: 38.2% for T-Mobile and 39.5%1 for Verizon.
Checking one address in Sugar Land
The figures on this page describe the whole area. Which providers report service at a single home or apartment is shown only on the FCC's own map: search the address at broadbandmap.fcc.gov. If a provider is listed there but cannot actually connect you within ten business days, or the location is missing or misplaced, the map has a button to file a challenge; providers must respond, and corrections flow into later releases. Prices and plans are not part of the FCC data: each provider must show them on its broadband facts label at the point of sale.
More on internet in Texas
The state picture, county by county: internet in Texas. Other large cities in the state: Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin, El Paso, Arlington, Corpus Christi, Plano, Lubbock, Laredo and Irving. Compare Sugar Land with any other city or state in the comparison tool.
Sources
- FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2026; Availability as of June 30, 2026; released November 10, 2026. broadbandmap.fcc.gov
- FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of June 30, 2022; Availability as of June 30, 2022; released May 10, 2024. broadbandmap.fcc.gov
- FCC, National Broadband Map, data as of December 31, 2025; Availability as of December 31, 2025; released November 3, 2026. broadbandmap.fcc.gov
- Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2020-2024 5-year detailed tables; 2020-2024; released January 29, 2026. api.census.gov
- Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2025 1-year detailed tables; 2025 (calendar-year sample); released October 29, 2026. api.census.gov
Margins of error (±) are at the 90% confidence level. A difference is called significant only when it passes the Census Bureau's test at that level. How every figure is built: methodology. Found an error? Write to [email protected]; corrections are listed on the updates page.