TomTom Traffic Index 2025: Australian city bucks global congestion trend

Brisbane’s urban traffic flows improve while the rest of Australia – and the world – worsens

Australian cities delivered a rare bright spot in TomTom’s 2025 Traffic Index, with Brisbane recording the only congestion improvement amongst the nation’s major capitals. The city’s congestion level dropped one percentage point to 41 percent, defying the global pattern where 466 of 500 surveyed cities experienced worsened travel times.

Adelaide emerged as Australia’s most congested capital with a 55 percent congestion level – up four percentage points from 2024 – meaning drivers spend 86 hours annually in rush-hour delays. Melbourne (53 percent, up one point) and Sydney (44 percent, up one point) followed, with the latter consuming 73 hours per year in peak-period traffic. Gold Coast, Newcastle and Hobart rounded out the measured Australian cities, all showing marginal congestion increases.

Australian congestion remains modest by global standards

Despite Adelaide’s domestic ranking, Australian cities remain remarkably uncongested compared to international peers. The nation’s worst performer sits 141 places behind global leader Mexico City (75.9 percent congestion), where drivers endure three times the delay rates experienced in Adelaide.

TomTom’s analysis reveals Australian capitals benefit from relatively efficient road networks. Sydney drivers cover 5.2 kilometres in 15-minute rush-hour periods – comparable to Brisbane’s 6.1 kilometres and substantially better than London’s 4.1 kilometres or Bengaluru’s 4.1 kilometres. Adelaide manages 5.0 kilometres in the same timeframe, whilst Melbourne achieves 5.3 kilometres despite higher absolute congestion levels.

The global picture proves considerably bleaker. Barranquilla, Colombia requires 3 minutes 40 seconds to traverse one kilometre – a metric unmatched in Australian cities. London’s travel time worsened to 3 minutes 38 seconds per kilometre, whilst Bengaluru (3 minutes 37 seconds) ranked second-most congested globally with a 74.4 percent congestion score.

Infrastructure changes mask genuine improvements

TomTom’s methodology highlights a critical nuance often obscured in congestion reporting: reduced speed limits and cycling infrastructure investments can artificially lower congestion percentages without actually improving driver experience. When cities decrease speed limits, free-flow travel times increase. If actual travel times remain constant whilst free-flow benchmarks rise, the mathematical gap between them narrows – creating the appearance of congestion relief.

This phenomenon affected 125 cities showing “improved” congestion levels, yet only 24 of these actually reduced average travel times per kilometre. Just 11 improved free-flow travel times. Groningen (Netherlands), Kiel (Germany), and New Orleans demonstrated genuine improvements, but most cities simply redefined their baselines through policy changes prioritising alternative transport modes over vehicle throughput.

Brisbane’s one-percentage-point improvement warrants scrutiny through this lens. Without accompanying reductions in absolute travel time, the congestion metric may reflect infrastructure modifications rather than enhanced traffic flow for motorists.

American cities demonstrate highway paradox

Los Angeles exemplifies how raw congestion percentages mislead without contextual analysis. Despite ranking as America’s most congested city (59.8 percent), LA’s travel time per kilometre places it 385th globally – amongst the fastest-moving surveyed cities. Free-flow travel takes just 58 seconds per kilometre; congested conditions extend this to merely 1 minute 33 seconds.

The explanation lies in infrastructure: 63 percent of LA’s city-centre roads are highways maintaining average speeds near 60 kilometres per hour. Miami, Seattle, Houston and Atlanta share similar profiles – high congestion percentages coupled with relatively swift absolute travel times due to multi-lane highway networks penetrating urban cores.

Yet these cities prove building more high-speed roads doesn’t eliminate congestion. LA’s highway-heavy infrastructure still suffers substantial congestion despite far exceeding the road capacity of higher-ranked but slower-moving cities. The data suggests capacity expansion alone cannot resolve urban traffic challenges.

New York’s congestion pricing delivers mixed results

New York’s congestion charge for downtown Manhattan produced measurable first-half improvements, with average congestion dropping from 46.9 percent to 45.6 percent compared to 2024’s equivalent period. Annual travel time per kilometre decreased two seconds – modest in absolute terms but significant for one of Earth’s busiest cities.

However, second-half 2025 data revealed deteriorating conditions. Average congestion reached 51.3 percent versus 50.4 percent during 2024’s second half, suggesting the pricing scheme’s initial impact may prove temporary without sustained policy pressure. The city’s cycling infrastructure investments aimed to broaden modal splits and extract drivers from personal vehicles, yet traffic trends indicate these measures face limits in maintaining improvements.

Fastest-worsening cities span three continents

Salto, Uruguay suffered 2025’s most dramatic deterioration, with travel times increasing 12.3 percent from 2 minutes 2 seconds per kilometre to 2 minutes 17 seconds. Three American cities followed: Syracuse (+8.9 percent, now 1 minute 26 seconds per kilometre), Minneapolis (+6.9 percent, now 1 minute 17 seconds) and San Francisco (+6.6 percent, now 2 minutes 58 seconds). Austrian city Innsbruck recorded a 6.9 percent increase to 1 minute 33 seconds per kilometre.

TomTom cautions single-year deteriorations may stem from temporary factors – prolonged adverse weather, major events, roadworks or speed limit reductions – rather than systemic decline. Sustained year-over-year worsening signals unchecked traffic growth or could indicate short-term disruption preceding long-term infrastructure improvements.

Metropolitan areas reveal inescapable congestion

City-centre metrics capture only the densest urban zones. TomTom’s metropolitan area analysis – encompassing suburbs, satellite districts and arterial roads across vastly larger geographical zones – exposes cities where congestion pervades entire regions rather than concentrating in cores.

Arequipa, Peru claims the world’s most congested metro area (68.8 percent), followed by Bogotá, Colombia (67.4 percent) and Mumbai, India (61.5 percent). Barranquilla again leads for absolute slowness, requiring 3 minutes 23 seconds per metropolitan-area kilometre – merely 17 seconds faster than its city centre. This near-parity demonstrates congestion spreading uniformly across Colombia’s Atlántico Department capital rather than concentrating in downtown districts.

When metropolitan congestion matches or approaches city-centre levels, residents cannot escape traffic by avoiding cores. The entire urban region functions as a single congested zone, eliminating the relief typically found in suburban or arterial corridors.

Just 34 cities achieved genuine travel-time improvements

Of nearly 500 surveyed cities, only 34 reduced inner-city travel times compared to 2024 – a 6.8 percent success rate highlighting the universal challenge of managing growing urban populations and vehicle fleets.

Sapporo, Japan benefited from weather normalisation after 2024’s exceptionally disruptive conditions, shaving one second per kilometre from average travel times. European standouts included Groningen (14 seconds per kilometre faster) and Kiel (10 seconds faster), whilst Paris and Toulon each improved by five and four seconds respectively.

Globally, cities implementing comprehensive data-driven traffic management – utilising TomTom’s granular flow analysis to identify bottlenecks and target infrastructure investments – demonstrated the most consistent improvements. However, population growth and increasing vehicle ownership rates overwhelm incremental gains in most municipalities.

Australian policy implications

Australia’s relatively modest congestion levels versus international peers shouldn’t breed complacency. Adelaide’s four-percentage-point annual increase and the broader pattern of rising delays across capitals mirror early-stage trends that transformed cities like London, Bengaluru and Mexico City into gridlocked nightmares over decades.

The Index data suggests Australian cities maintain a narrow window to implement preventative measures before congestion becomes intractable. European cities achieving genuine improvements combined aggressive cycling infrastructure, public transit investment, and strategic road pricing – not capacity expansion through highway construction, which the American experience proves ineffective at reducing congestion.

Brisbane’s sole improvement amongst Australian capitals warrants deeper investigation into whether infrastructure changes or genuine flow enhancements drove the result. If policy modifications merely adjusted speed limits without material traffic improvements, the congestion reduction represents statistical artifact rather than real progress.

With just 34 of 500 global cities achieving measurable success, Australia’s urban planners face mounting evidence that business-as-usual approaches cannot contain worsening traffic. The question is whether policymakers will act whilst congestion remains manageable, or wait until Australian cities match the three-minute-per-kilometre crawl now standard in the world’s slowest urban centres.