▮▮Coloprice

Market comparison

Christchurch, New Zealand vs Hamilton, New Zealand

Both columns are built from the catalog and the price index: Christchurch — 8 facilities from 7 operators, Hamilton — 4 facilities from 4 operators. Where a benchmark or a tariff is not published, the cell says so.

Markets side by side

FieldChristchurchHamilton
Tracked facilities84
Operators74
Published IT capacity1 MW (1 of 8 sites publish)14 MW (1 of 4 sites publish)
Operational84
Under construction / announced00
Tier III+ certified sites00
Sites with any certification11
Liquid-cooled sites00
AI-ready sites00
Wholesale benchmark, $/kW/monthnot publishednot published
Benchmark change, yoynot publishednot published
Industrial power tariff, $/kWhnot publishednot published
Average Coloprice Score11/100 across 8 sites16/100 across 4 sites
Latency between the twonot published

Counts are the Coloprice catalog as of 2026-10-01; 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: Christchurch — 8; Hamilton — 4
  • Operators: Christchurch — 7; Hamilton — 4
  • Published IT capacity: Christchurch — 1 MW (1 of 8 sites publish); Hamilton — 14 MW (1 of 4 sites publish)
  • Operational: Christchurch — 8; Hamilton — 4
  • Average Coloprice Score: Christchurch — 11/100 across 8 sites; Hamilton — 16/100 across 4 sites

Top facilities by score

Christchurch, New Zealand

Hamilton, New Zealand

Open Christchurch data centers →Open Hamilton data centers →Colocation pricing in Christchurch →Colocation pricing in Hamilton →

Other comparisons

Auckland (Silverdale) vs ChristchurchChristchurch vs Wellington (Te Aro)Auckland (Silverdale) vs HamiltonHamilton vs Wellington (Te Aro)