Market comparison
Osaka (Ibaraki), Japan vs Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
Both columns are built from the catalog and the price index: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 24 facilities from 13 operators, Yokohama, Kanagawa — 4 facilities from 3 operators. Where a benchmark or a tariff is not published, the cell says so.
Osaka (Ibaraki), Japan
24
Tracked facilities · Operators: 13
Wholesale benchmark, $/kW/month: $280 (country-level)
Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
4
Tracked facilities · Operators: 3
Wholesale benchmark, $/kW/month: $280 (country-level)
Markets side by side
| Field | Osaka (Ibaraki) | Yokohama, Kanagawa |
|---|---|---|
| Tracked facilities | 24 | 4 |
| Operators | 13 | 3 |
| Published IT capacity | 265 MW (10 of 24 sites publish) | 19 MW (1 of 4 sites publish) |
| Operational | 20 | 4 |
| Under construction / announced | 4 | 0 |
| Tier III+ certified sites | 0 | 0 |
| Sites with any certification | 6 | 0 |
| Liquid-cooled sites | 3 | 0 |
| AI-ready sites | 2 | 0 |
| Wholesale benchmark, $/kW/month | $280 (country-level) | $280 (country-level) |
| Benchmark change, yoy | 0% | 0% |
| Industrial power tariff, $/kWh | $0.185 | $0.185 |
| Average Coloprice Score | 21/100 across 24 sites | 12/100 across 4 sites |
| Latency between the two | not published | |
Counts are the Coloprice catalog as of 2026-09-26; benchmarks are the Colocation Price Index (Q3 2026). Operators publish some facts and not others — an empty cell means «not published», not zero.
Where they differ
Only fields both sides publish and where the values are not identical. This is not a judgement: the right choice depends on the workload, the contract and the site.
- Tracked facilities: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 24; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 4
- Operators: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 13; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 3
- Published IT capacity: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 265 MW (10 of 24 sites publish); Yokohama, Kanagawa — 19 MW (1 of 4 sites publish)
- Operational: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 20; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 4
- Under construction / announced: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 4; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 0
- Sites with any certification: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 6; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 0
- Liquid-cooled sites: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 3; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 0
- AI-ready sites: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 2; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 0
- Average Coloprice Score: Osaka (Ibaraki) — 21/100 across 24 sites; Yokohama, Kanagawa — 12/100 across 4 sites
Top facilities by score
Osaka (Ibaraki), Japan
- Equinix OS3 Equinix
- Equinix OS1 Equinix
- Equinix OS2x Equinix
Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
- Digital Edge TYO4/5/6 Digital Edge · 18.5 MW
- Nexcenter Yokohama 1 Data Center NTT Communications (NTT DOCOMO BUSINESS) — Nexcenter
- IIJ Yokohama 1 (Kohoku) Data Center Internet Initiative Japan (IIJ)
Open Osaka (Ibaraki) data centers →Open Yokohama, Kanagawa data centers →Colocation pricing in Osaka (Ibaraki) →Colocation pricing in Yokohama, Kanagawa →
Other comparisons
Osaka (Ibaraki) vs Tokyo (Inzai)Osaka (Ibaraki) vs Seika (Kyoto Prefecture)Tokyo (Inzai) vs Yokohama, KanagawaSeika (Kyoto Prefecture) vs Yokohama, Kanagawa