Telecommunications Users Association chief executive Ernie Newman said the broadband performance report released this week would ensure that at last, there was meaningful and informed choice for users.
"Broadband is an exceptionally difficult product for customers to assess what they are actually getting compared to other potential suppliers."
The Commerce Commission's first release of regular reports would do much for consumer awareness and help considerably in the selection of a broadband service, he said.
Changing telecommunication companies was simple as well as economically rewarding, Mr Newman said.
The Epitiro-IDC New Zealand Broadband index for the March quarter showed average industry New Zealand performance was 28% behind the United Kingdom.
Epitiro managing director Mike Cranna said the result was consistent with Epitiro data on other markets, including Australia and the United States.
That showed New Zealand had a long way to go in both terms of absolute performance and performance consistency.
Hamilton took top place among the five broadband cities measured.
Orcon achieved the highest scores in Dunedin and Hamilton and Telecom produced a slightly above average performance in Dunedin and Hamilton.
TelstraClear continued to show the strongest performance in Wellington and Christchurch, where it owns its own cable network, and in Auckland.
But it did not perform as well outside those areas.
The report ranked Telecom, Vodafone and smaller company Slingshot the worst performers.
The three companies scored average to below average in tests, including time taken to connect to the Internet, download speeds and the time taken to send and receive emails.
By contrast, industry minnows such as MaxNet, Snap and Compass provided good services in their target areas.
The quarterly study by analysts Epitiro Technologies and IDC measured 13 Internet service providers in 11 sites across the five major cities.
The report was not all bad for the big companies - the writers noted large companies had it tougher than their competition, because of crowded networks.
Smaller networks had it easier, with relatively few users at any one time.
Mr Cranna said Telecom was partly a victim of its own size.
"When you have 60% of the market, that's an awful lot of customers and an awful lot of network to maintain.
"But we also know that traditionally Telecom has underinvested in its network."
IDC research manager Roslie Nelson said the data portrayed a market in transition.
"Millions of dollars are being poured into infrastructure, technology and services but this is not yet improving the experience for consumers and businesses.
We are still in the early stages. We believe the investment in fibre and the local loop will begin to take effect over the year."
The report should be seen as a benchmark against which to measure future progress, she said.
Broadband users should interpret the report with care, she said.
The results showed the Internet service providers (ISPs) with the strongest subscriber growth were not necessarily delivering the strongest broadband performance in the quarter.
One of the reasons was the size and growth of the top five ISPs would have contributed to network congestion, with may users competing for bandwidth at peak periods, in contrast to the many smaller ISPs who had fewer users.
Mr Newman hoped every service provider would take the figures serious, recognise that customers were better informed and more demanding than ever, and actively work to improve their service.
