Europe’s best and worst airports
Airports in Europe remain a significant factor shaping the travel experience, serving as both the starting and ending points. Newly released analysis from Holidu, the holiday rental platform, has pinpointed the top-performing airports and identified areas for improvement to meet passengers’ increasingly demanding needs.
Air travel remains on the road to full recovery throughout the continent, with millions going through the doors of the terminals every day. Airport performance has increasingly been a litmus test for traveller satisfaction, ranging from punctuality and facilities through accessibility and comfort. This year’s ratings reveal stark contrasts between centres of efficiency and laggards.
Champions of efficiency
Zurich Airport leads the continent’s highest-rated hubs in operational efficiency. Due to its tidiness and punctuality, it remains one of Europe’s most reliable portals. Also at the top of the list is Munich Airport, which is praised for its extensive variety of restaurants and entertainment facilities and easy connections to the city centre.
The Scandinavian airports are among the best and Helsinki Airport was singled out for clean lines and smooth passenger flows. Copenhagen and Oslo airports follow hard on their heels, providing visitors with trouble-free trips supported by sensible signage, rationally planned terminals and modern facilities. They collectively demonstrate the best of an airport that can manage high volumes with consistency of service.
Mid-range players
Few European airports can approximate these high standards, but there are some that settle into the mid-range category. Airports such as Milan Malpensa and Lisbon show an upgrade, but are beset by crowded facilities and a patchy quality of service. Although spending on infrastructure has been evident, passenger surveys highlight bottlenecks within security and baggage-handling checks as problematic.
Barcelona El Prat is another such airport. Even with contemporary facilities and effective transport connections, passengers cite jams at peak times more than once. These airports illustrate the challenge of balancing their status as premier tourist destinations and maintaining consistently high service standards.
New research finds clear divisions
Holidu’s new research into the highest and lowest rated airports in Europe reveals the widening gap between the continent’s top and bottom facilities. The study considers passenger input across a host of criteria ranging from cleanliness and wait times to terminal comfort and worker helpfulness.
At the top of the rankings, Zurich, Munich and Helsinki are the efficiency benchmarks. London Luton, Paris Beauvais and Brussels Charleroi perennially rank at the very tail end of the list. Passenger reviews at such airports complain about overcrowding, insufficient seats, obsolete terminal facilities and slow security queues.
The report concludes that while some airports are successfully transforming for the pandemic travel peak, others remain hampered by ageing facilities and disappointing investment.
The poorest performers
London Luton continues to be panned for its congestion, dearth of facilities and too few seats. As one of the busiest bases for budget airlines, it cannot deliver an acceptable passenger experience. Passengers point to the stress of crowded terminals, lengthy security check queues and thin dining or retail options compared with peers’ airports. Most passengers perceive the surroundings as crowded, with facilities struggling to handle the increased passenger volumes. Redevelopment is happening slowly; however, the pace of redevelopment has been insufficient to anticipate demand and passengers arrive annoyed even before their flight begins.
Paris Beauvais also battles the same issues, with passengers bemoaning the lengthy queues, lack of facilities and accessibility problems at the airport located remotely from central Paris. Travellers frequently cite the unavailability of comfortable seats and the lack of adequate shelter at peak times, even when the weather is unfavourable. For most, the experience of going through Beauvais is more akin to an endurance trial than either part of a vacation or business visit.
Brussels Charleroi is also among the lowest-rated airports. It is heavily dependent upon budget flights, which funnel enormous throngs through doors that don’t appear large enough for that number of people. The terminal is consistently described as cramped and bottlenecks at the check-in and security only add more minutes of wasted delay. Seat shortfalls and sparse dining facilities only add to the unfavourable image, with passengers having few options for relaxation before flight time. The procedure for the vast majority of passengers is more about anxiety than streamlining, subtracting from its low rating among passenger opinion polls.
These airports reflect the split throughout Europe, where one airport excels in quality and another lags behind. The comparison highlights the need for ongoing investment and development, as outdated facilities and a lack of foresight risk undermining Europe’s overall credibility as a welcoming and accessible destination for travellers.
What the rankings reveal about Europe’s travel future
Rankings reveal more than passenger preference; they give an insight into Europe’s transport infrastructure as a whole. Successful airports embrace digital solutions, streamline security checks and constantly invest in passenger comfort. Underperforming airports often indicate underinvestment and an inability to respond to growing demand.
As European aviation continues along its growth trajectory, passenger satisfaction will also be maintained. Passengers are increasingly lured by airports where operational efficiency is paired with comfort and amenities and will reward innovators and penalise laggards.
Best and worst airports of 2025 are a telling illustration that the traveller experience begins long before lift-off. The gap between the smooth and the bumbled underscores the degree to which airports can make or break the perception of a journey and, therefore, of Europe’s capacity to provide.
The editorial unit
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
YouTube
RSS