Safety score
Personal safety, institutional trust, and resilience signals informed by international safety and crime data.
Safety in Copenhagen92/100
Safety
Safety in Copenhagen
Copenhagen scores high on safety due to strong public trust, low violent-crime context, and reliable institutional response. Safety in Copenhagen scores 92/100, placing it in the leading group of the indexed set.
- Last updated
- 2026-05-16
- Data year
- 2025
- Module score
- 92/100
Safety score
92/100
High trust and low violent-crime context support resident safety.
Resident perception
Very high
Day-to-day safety perception is strong across most neighborhoods.
Watch item
Bike theft
Property-related opportunistic risks remain the practical pain point.
Copenhagen safety data table
This HTML table mirrors the visible score cards so important comparison data is never trapped in a browser-only chart.
| Metric | Value | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Safety score | 92/100 | Stable institutional response reinforces the score. |
| Resident perception | Very high | Pedestrian and night-time safety are widely positive. |
| Watch item | Bike theft | Common-sense precautions still useful. |
Safety city comparison
A crawlable comparison across a selection of same-country and top-scoring cities. The complete set is reachable via the rankings, the cities index, and each city profile.
| City | Score | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Copenhagen (this page) | 92/100 | Copenhagen scores high on safety due to strong public trust, low violent-crime context, and reliable institutional response. |
| Vejle | 82/100 | Vejle's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Aarhus | 82/100 | Aarhus's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Frederiksberg | 78/100 | Frederiksberg's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Odense | 76/100 | Odense's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Helsingor | 67/100 | Helsingor's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Kolding | 65/100 | Kolding's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Aalborg | 50/100 | Aalborg's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Roskilde | 50/100 | Roskilde's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Esbjerg | 50/100 | Esbjerg's safety profile is a directional indicator; verified country-level emergency profiles attach via the country hub where available. |
| Singapore | 95/100 | Singapore is among the safest cities globally, with very low violent-crime context and strong institutional response. |
| Tokyo | 93/100 | Tokyo scores at the very top globally on safety, with very low violent-crime context, strong institutions, and high resident perception of safety. |
| Kyoto | 93/100 | Kyoto scores very high on safety, with stable institutional response and steady public-safety perception. |
| Osaka | 92/100 | Osaka scores high on safety, with strong institutional response and steady public-safety perception. |
| Zurich | 91/100 | Zurich is among the safest large European cities, with very low violent-crime context and strong institutional response. |
| Seoul | 90/100 | Seoul is among the safer large global cities, with low violent-crime context, strong institutional response, and consistent public-space confidence. |
| Taipei | 90/100 | Taipei is among the safer large global cities, with very low violent-crime context and consistent neighborhood experience. |
| Doha | 90/100 | Doha is among the safer global cities, with very low violent-crime context and consistent neighborhood experience. |
| Abu Dhabi | 90/100 | Abu Dhabi is among the safer global cities, with very low violent-crime context and consistent neighborhood experience. |
| Helsinki | 90/100 | Helsinki scores well on safety, with strong institutional response and stable public-safety perception. |
| Wellington | 90/100 | Wellington scores high on safety, with stable institutional response and steady public-safety perception. |
| Munich | 89/100 | Munich scores well on safety, with strong institutional response and stable public-safety perception. |
| Amsterdam | 88/100 | Amsterdam scores high on safety, with low violent-crime context and strong everyday public-space confidence. |
| Vienna | 88/100 | Vienna is among the safer large European capitals, with low violent-crime context and consistent everyday public-space confidence. |
| Hong Kong | 88/100 | Hong Kong scores high on safety with low violent-crime context and reliable institutional response across the metro. |
| Dubai | 88/100 | Dubai scores high on safety, with very low violent-crime context and reliable institutional response across the metro. |
| Prague | 88/100 | Prague is among the safer European capitals, with low violent-crime context and consistent neighborhood experience. |
| Oslo | 88/100 | Oslo scores well on safety, with strong institutional response and steady public-safety planning. |
| Edinburgh | 88/100 | Edinburgh scores well on safety, with stable institutional response and steady public-safety perception. |
| Perth | 88/100 | Perth scores well on safety, with stable institutional response and steady public-safety perception. |
| Sydney | 87/100 | Sydney is among the safer large global cities, with low violent-crime context and strong institutional response. |
Interpretation
Safety scoring blends violent-crime context, perceived safety, and institutional response capacity. Trust and reliability raise the score even where opportunistic risks exist. Across the indexed cities the safety average is 63/100, so Copenhagen is 29 points above the median. Data year 2025; last updated 2026-05-16. Drawn from 2 institutional references.
Read this module with the main open the copenhagen city profile and the read the scoring methodology page so single-topic pages do not hide tradeoffs across dimensions.
Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation. Verified datasets are being integrated; official sources should be used for critical decisions.
Sources
2 institutional references inform this view, listed below with reliability notes. Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation; verified datasets are being integrated and official sources should be used for critical decisions.
- United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime: UNODC Data Portal
Used as a directional benchmark for relative city safety framing.
- UN-Habitat: World Cities Report 2024
Used as a policy and methodology reference for urban exposure and resilience signals.
Continue exploring
These links connect module pages back to city, ranking, and sibling topic paths with crawlable href values.
Copenhagen city profile
Return to the complete Copenhagen profile with all module scores and source context.
Cost of Living in Copenhagen
Affordability, essential costs, and day-to-day financial pressure for residents.
Air Quality in Copenhagen
Health-oriented air-quality conditions with context from WHO, EEA, and EPA benchmarks.
Energy in Copenhagen
Clean-energy readiness, grid resilience, and solar or efficiency opportunity signals.
Internet Speed in Copenhagen
Broadband and mobile connectivity quality, latency, and digital-readiness signals for residents and remote workers.
Climate Risk in Copenhagen
Climate exposure, hazard frequency, and adaptation context for floods, heat, storms, and wildfires.
Overall Intelligence
A balanced ranking of cities across affordability, air quality, clean-energy readiness, and resilience.
Quality of Life
Cities that combine strong services, mobility, safety, clean air, and resilience into a healthy day-to-day profile.