SI
Integration Index
โ† Back to rankings
๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด

Bucharest

Romania ยท TPBI โ€“ Asociaศ›ia de Dezvoltare Intercomunitarฤƒ pentru Transport Public Bucureศ™ti-Ilfov (surface transport only; metro under Metrorex/Ministry of Transport, rail under CFR)

Bucharest has extensive coverage but fragmented integration: TPBI coordinates surface transport while Metrorex and rail operate under separate jurisdictions, with a combo ticket and Integrated Metropolitan Pass providing partial bridging. Physical interchanges, timed connections, and MaaS integration remain weak, and the 2025 rollback of airport-rail integration is a notable regression.

Integration Index
32.3/100

How integrated public transport is โ€” quantitative reach and qualitative interchange combined

Car-free liveability
38.7/100

How easy it is to get around without a car. A separate measure, reported alongside the index.

Equity
50.0/100

How evenly distributed transit access is across the city

Physical Interchange
3.7/10

Bucharest's interchanges suffer from fragmented designโ€”split stations at major hubs, uneven signage modernization, and widespread accessibility gapsโ€”placing physical integration substantially below metropolitan standards.

?
  • Signage4/10
  • Mode distance4/10
  • Physical experience3/10
Ticketing & Fares
4.0/10

Bucharest's integrated ticketing remains fragmented across separate STB and Metrorex systems, with contactless payment only partially deployed and multimodal passes undermined by airport rail discontinuation and inconsistent coverage.

?
  • Single platform / contactless4/10
  • Interchange penalty absence3/10
  • Multimodal products5/10
Digital Information
6.0/10

Google Maps has real-time bus/tram data, Info Transport Bucharest and 24Pay apps work well, and TPBI is deploying GTFS-RT and dynamic panels; coverage is good but quality varies.

System Integration
2.3/10

Absence of timed transfers and integrated fares fragments Bucharest's network: daytime metro and bus lack coordination, night service operates independently from a central hub, and mobility apps remain siloed from public transit payment systems.

?
  • Timed connections2/10
  • Off-peak integration3/10
  • MaaS reach2/10

City Profile

Population
2,131,034
2018
GDP per Capita
โ‚ฌ54,800EUR
2024
2% above EU avg

Accessibility Map

Loading mapโ€ฆ

Compare with another city

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Zรผrich๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Bern๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Munich๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Basel๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ Luxembourg๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Frankfurt๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด Oslo๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Copenhagen๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Nuremberg๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Geneva๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น Vienna๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Hannover๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Utrecht๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ The Hague๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Tampere๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Prague๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Eindhoven๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Dresden๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด Trondheim๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Stuttgart๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Dรผsseldorf๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Cologne๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Hamburg๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Amsterdam๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช Tallinn๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Warsaw๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Strasbourg๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ ลรณdลบ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Bratislava๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Rotterdam๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Paris๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Berlin๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Turku๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Bologna๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง London๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Aarhus๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Katowice๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡บ Budapest๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Edinburgh๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด Bergen๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Leipzig๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฌ Sofia๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช Tartu๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด Cluj-Napoca๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Bremen๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Barcelona๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Madrid๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Liรจge๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Helsinki๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Milan๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด Timiศ™oara๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Ghent๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น Linz๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Bilbao๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Antwerp๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Brno๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Lyon๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡น Vilnius๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Malmรถ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Liverpool๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Manchester๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Nantes๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น Porto๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ป Riga๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Stockholm๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช Dublin๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Bordeaux๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Toulouse๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Cardiff๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Zaragoza๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Wrocล‚aw๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Ljubljana๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Brussels๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Lille๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Birmingham๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Sheffield๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ท Zagreb๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Gothenburg๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Valencia๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Genoa๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Turin๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Marseille๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Glasgow๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น Lisbon๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Krakรณw๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Gdaล„sk๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Leeds๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Nice๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Mรกlaga๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Poznaล„๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Rome๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Seville๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Bristol๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡พ Nicosia๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Florence๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Naples