Unlocking Potential in Europe Part 2
Countries in Central Europe show both high forecast capture rates as well as total revenue potentials.
Hungary has the highest total revenue potential of this group, while having a high price predictability score. From a revenue only perspective the country offers favorable scenario for BESS development.
In Hungary, Germany, Austria, Croatia, Czech Republic, and Poland, total revenue potential capture rates are consistently above 80%, suggesting these markets share predictable daily price profiles that make forecasting comparatively reliable. However, differences in realized revenues reveal important nuances.
Hungary sets the benchmark, delivering the highest capture rate (87%) and the strongest realized revenue across the region.
Croatia surprises positively: despite a lower capture rate than Germany and Austria, it achieves higher realized revenues, highlighting how market size and volatility patterns can reshape the investment case.
Key takeaway for investors: High capture percentages confirm that these markets are relatively predictable, but the absolute investment opportunity still varies significantly. Moreover, our results are based on one forecasting approach — our team continuously tests multiple models to further improve capture revenues, though some residual revenue value will still remain uncaptured, as unpredictable events (e.g. power outages) can create energy price movements hard to predict.
Notes: Revenues are based on Day-ahead energy prices from 2020 to 2025.
High absolute revenues in the Baltics & Balkans are offset by low capture rates.
Strong capture efficiency in Romania, Bulgaria, and Serbia contrasts with the Baltics, where forecast challenges reduce investment attractiveness despite sizable revenue pools. Results highlight the importance of looking beyond absolute revenues.
Romania leads the group, delivering both the highest capture rate (86%) and the strongest realized revenues.
Baltic markets (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia) show attractive absolute revenues, with less than 5% difference between them, but capture rates below 70% push them down in the realized revenue ranking. This demonstrates how forecast challenges can erode investment attractiveness, even in markets with strong headline numbers.
Greece and Serbia close the ranking, with Greece delivering more absolute revenue but only a 78% capture rate, while Serbia achieves a higher capture percentage but on a smaller revenue pool.
Bulgaria secures second place, with Serbia trailing the group — despite Serbia’s 87% capture rate, its smaller absolute revenue base reduces its overall potential.
Key takeaway for investors: In these markets, forecast capture rate efficiency is the decisive factor for investment prioritization. Countries like the Baltics, with strong theoretical revenues but weak capture performance, highlight the value of our deeper country-level analysis, which can uncover ways to improve forecasting accuracy — and in turn, unlock stronger business cases.
Notes: Revenues are based on Day-ahead energy prices from 2020 to 2025.
Key points and final remarks across the European countries evaluated.
As seen across countries, a high capture rate does not necessarily translate into high revenue. Generally, most markets tend to have a capture rate around 80-85%, with some exceptions such as Norway and Northern Sweden.
Countries such as Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria exhibit favorable investment cases, with high forecast accuracies (87-85%) and high total revenue potential. Neighboring countries such as Serbia share similar forecast accuracies, but with a smaller total revenue potential.
Alternatively, examining countries with the highest total revenue potential, a different dynamics emerge. Countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia exhibit high realized revenues despite lower forecast accuracies. Showing that a highly volatile market can still be profitable, despite being harder to predict its power prices.
Understanding what influence these behaviors is directly tied to understanding what drives the power price pattern in the country. Potential factors could include share generation between countries and generation mix. For instance, a country like Spain might have a higher forecast accuracy (84%), but lower total revenue potential because its prices are heavily driven by Solar generation.
Other elements may involve unplanned outages, weather events, changes in market regulations, and many more. Although such events are harder to predict, evaluating them can de-risk project investment decisions.
In the following analysis, we will examine a selection of countries to identify the the key drivers behind differences in predictability and realized revenue.
Notes: 2025 revenues until are based for half a year until June the 2nd at 12:00; Not all European Countries are included in this analysis.
1) Sweden South is Price zone SE 3 and SE 4.
2) Italy, omitting Sicily, Sardinia, and Calabria.
3) All prices zones for Norway averaged NO1 – NO5.
4) Sweden North is Price zone SE 1 and SE 2.
Interested in learning more? Let’s start the conversation.
Gabriel Leite
Lead – Project & Energy Systems Optimization
gle@bluepp.dk
