Language:NO / EN
Statistics

Most and fewest completing upper secondary

The share of pupils who completed upper secondary education within five or six years.

Vindafjord has the highest completion share of Norway's municipalities at 94.2% (2025). The lowest is Vega at 60.5%. Source: FHI, indicator 623, processed by Morning Analytics 2 November 2026.

Download the table (CSV) Sharing image (PNG)

94.2%Highest: Vindafjord
80.5%Median of the municipalities
60.5%Lowest: Vega

The picture in figures

The bars show the ten highest and the ten lowest of 269 municipalities. The dashed line is the median of all municipalities.

Highest 10
VindafjordVindafjord94.2%HoleHole94.2%SuldalSuldal92.3%FrognFrogn92.2%RørosRøros91.4%GiskeGiske90.8%BærumBærum89.6%LusterLuster89.2%AukraAukra89.1%HeimHeim89.0%
Lowest 10
VegaVega60.5%FlakstadFlakstad60.8%KåfjordKåfjord61.9%KautokeinoKautokeino63.5%ÅmliÅmli63.5%HamarøyHamarøy63.7%IbestadIbestad63.8%RingebuRingebu64.4%TanaTana64.8%GildeskålGildeskål64.9%
How 269 municipalities spread
60.5% – 63.3%: 363.3% – 66.1%: 1066.1% – 68.9%: 568.9% – 71.7%: 1471.7% – 74.5%: 1374.5% – 77.3%: 3677.3% – 80.1%: 4380.1% – 82.9%: 6382.9% – 85.7%: 4385.7% – 88.6%: 2688.6% – 91.4%: 891.4% – 94.2%: 560.5%94.2%completion share →

Each bar is the number of municipalities in a range of values. The dashed line is the median. Hover over a bar to see the range.

Analysis: why are some at the top and others at the bottom?

We compared completion share with every other municipal figure we have, from Statistics Norway, NIPH and the Brønnøysund Register Centre. Below are the figures that go most closely together with completion share across the country, and what marks the municipalities at the top and bottom on those figures.

The pattern across the country

  • Municipalities that rank high on «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» most often rank low on completion share (strong association, rank correlation −0.52 across 269 municipalities; Statistics Norway table 09429).
  • Municipalities that rank high on «Life expectancy at birth (15-year period)» most often also rank high on completion share (moderate association, rank correlation 0.39 across 269 municipalities; NIPH indicator 508).
  • Municipalities that rank high on «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» most often rank low on completion share (moderate association, rank correlation −0.39 across 269 municipalities; NIPH indicator 787).
  • Municipalities that rank high on «Employed, share of age 20–66» most often also rank high on completion share (moderate association, rank correlation 0.38 across 269 municipalities; Statistics Norway table 11618).

The highest and the lowest

  • No. 1 Vindafjord (94.2%) Fits the pattern: «Employed, share of age 20–66» 81.0% (no. 27 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 11618); «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» 8.4% (no. 298 of 357 from the top; NIPH indicator 787); «Life expectancy at birth (15-year period)» 83.3 (no. 63 of 348 from the top; NIPH indicator 508). Most distinctive industry: jordbruk og tjenester tilknyttet jordbruk, jakt og viltstell, 10% of the jobs, 7.6 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).
  • No. 2 Hole (94.2%) Fits the pattern: «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» 6.7% (no. 349 of 357 from the top; NIPH indicator 787); «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» 19.6% (no. 337 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 09429). Most distinctive industry: overnattingsvirksomhet, 5% of the jobs, 4.8 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).
  • No. 3 Suldal (92.3%) Fits the pattern: «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» 8.2% (no. 306 of 357 from the top; NIPH indicator 787); «Employed, share of age 20–66» 79.5% (no. 71 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 11618); «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» 22.1% (no. 276 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 09429). Most distinctive industry: bryting og bergverksdrift ellers, 14% of the jobs, 117.6 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).
  • No. 269 Vega (60.5%, among the lowest) Fits the pattern: «Employed, share of age 20–66» 71.6% (no. 318 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 11618); «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» 30.7% (no. 45 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 09429); «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» 13.8% (no. 60 of 357 from the top; NIPH indicator 787). Most distinctive industry: fiske, fangst og akvakultur, 10% of the jobs, 12.2 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).
  • No. 268 Flakstad (60.8%, among the lowest) Fits the pattern: «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» 35.7% (no. 14 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 09429); «Employed, share of age 20–66» 70.9% (no. 328 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 11618). Most distinctive industry: fiske, fangst og akvakultur, 20% of the jobs, 25.1 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).
  • No. 267 Kåfjord (61.9%, among the lowest) Fits the pattern: «Life expectancy at birth (15-year period)» 80.1 (no. 339 of 348 from the top; NIPH indicator 508); «Share with lower secondary as highest education (16 and over)» 34.9% (no. 15 of 357 from the top; Statistics Norway table 09429); «Disability benefit recipients aged 20–66 (standardised)» 15.1% (no. 27 of 357 from the top; NIPH indicator 787). Most distinctive industry: jordbruk og tjenester tilknyttet jordbruk, jakt og viltstell, 8% of the jobs, 6.5 times the national share (Statistics Norway table 13470, 2025).

The analysis describes what goes together, not what causes what. Two figures can follow each other because both depend on something else, such as size, location or industry. The figures are from the latest year available for each source, so the years can differ. Rank correlation runs from −1 to 1; values near 1 mean the municipalities lie in roughly the same order on both measures.

What explains the placing?

  • 1. Vindafjord 94.2% 17% above the median of the municipalities.
  • 2. Hole 94.2% 17% above the median of the municipalities.
  • 3. Suldal 92.3% Small municipality (3,891 inhabitants): one company or a few people can move the figure a lot. 15% above the median of the municipalities.
  • 267. Kåfjord 61.9% Small municipality (1,939 inhabitants): one company or a few people can move the figure a lot. 23% below the median of the municipalities.
  • 268. Flakstad 60.8% Small municipality (1,235 inhabitants): one company or a few people can move the figure a lot. 24% below the median of the municipalities.
  • 269. Vega 60.5% Small municipality (1,202 inhabitants): one company or a few people can move the figure a lot. 25% below the median of the municipalities.
#Municipality County Inhabitants completion share
51 Selbusmall municipality Trøndelag 4,258 84.7%
52 Lyngdal Agder 10,922 84.7%
53 Ulstein Møre og Romsdal 8,958 84.7%
54 Tingvollsmall municipality Møre og Romsdal 3,066 84.6%
55 Ørsta Møre og Romsdal 11,068 84.6%
56 Nordreisasmall municipality Troms 4,863 84.5%
57 Nord-Aurdal Innlandet 6,424 84.5%
58 Time Rogaland 20,461 84.3%
59 Strandasmall municipality Møre og Romsdal 4,333 84.1%
60 Nore og Uvdalsmall municipality Buskerud 2,459 84.1%
61 Volda Møre og Romsdal 11,009 83.9%
62 Melhus Trøndelag 17,828 83.8%
63 Stavanger Rogaland 151,669 83.8%
64 Moss Østfold 53,207 83.8%
65 Bremangersmall municipality Vestland 3,381 83.6%
66 Stord Vestland 19,276 83.5%
67 Austevoll Vestland 5,515 83.5%
68 Øystre Slidresmall municipality Innlandet 3,347 83.5%
69 Holsmall municipality Buskerud 4,552 83.5%
70 Sveio Vestland 5,766 83.5%
71 Sunndal Møre og Romsdal 7,094 83.4%
72 Eigersund Rogaland 15,546 83.3%
73 Eidskog Innlandet 6,103 83.2%
74 Molde Møre og Romsdal 33,291 83.2%
75 Vennesla Agder 15,772 83.2%
76 Verdal Trøndelag 15,435 83.1%
77 Stange Innlandet 21,839 83.0%
78 Kongsvinger Innlandet 18,191 83.0%
79 Gjesdal Rogaland 12,715 83.0%
80 Kvam Vestland 8,490 83.0%
81 Tysnessmall municipality Vestland 3,053 83.0%
82 Stad Vestland 9,616 83.0%
83 Vestre Toten Innlandet 13,612 82.9%
84 Herøy (Møre og Romsdal) Møre og Romsdal 9,003 82.9%
85 Askøy Vestland 30,600 82.8%
86 Høyangersmall municipality Vestland 3,883 82.8%
87 Harstad Troms 25,204 82.8%
88 Sandnes Rogaland 85,785 82.7%
89 Rælingen Akershus 20,904 82.7%
90 Hamar Innlandet 33,817 82.6%
91 Bodø Nordland 53,638 82.6%
92 Trondheim Trøndelag 218,460 82.6%
93 Alstahaug Nordland 7,489 82.6%
94 Nordkappsmall municipality Finnmark 2,945 82.5%
95 Færder Vestfold 27,743 82.5%
96 Bergen Vestland 294,860 82.5%
97 Fredrikstad Østfold 86,243 82.5%
98 Tønsberg Vestfold 60,246 82.4%
99 Rauma Møre og Romsdal 7,195 82.4%
100 Råde Østfold 7,892 82.4%

Not available for 88 municipalities (hidden by the source, too small or not measured): Aremark, Askvoll, Aurland, Beiarn, Berlevåg, Bindal, Bokn, Bygland, Bykle, Båtsfjord, Dyrøy, Dønna …