RunRepeat: Norway, U.S. gym rates

RunRepeat’s gym-industry statistics page, which was recirculated on social media on May 19, showed Norway and Sweden with the world’s highest gym-membership penetration at 22.0% of the population. The same RunRepeat chart listed the United States at 21.2%, placing it just behind the two Nordic countries. India was listed at 0.15% and Indonesia at 0.2%, highlighting a wide spread in membership rates across countries. ### Which numbers from the RunRepeat chart are drawing attention? RunRepeat’s country-by-country penetration table listed Sweden and Norway at 22.0%, followed by the United States at 21.2%. The chart, cited in a May 19 social-media post, compared the share of each country’s population holding gym memberships rather than total memberships or total clubs. India’s 0.15% rate and Indonesia’s 0.2% rate were the lowest figures highlighted in the same chart excerpt. (runrepeat.com) Those numbers put the gap between the leading countries and the lowest-ranked countries at more than 20 percentage points. ### Is this a new 2026 survey or an older dataset being shared again? RunRepeat’s webpage is titled “200+ Gym Industry Statistics 2021 [Global Analysis],” and the page was published about 2.5 years ago, according to the search result snippet. (runrepeat.com) The figures circulating on May 19 therefore appear to come from an older RunRepeat compilation rather than a newly released 2026 survey. The May 19 post did not change the underlying source. The RunRepeat page still presents the country penetration figures as part of a broader industry roundup that also includes revenue, gym counts and membership totals. ### What does “gym membership penetration” measure here? RunRepeat described the metric as market penetration, meaning the share of a country’s population that is a gym member. (runrepeat.com) That is different from the total number of members, where larger countries can rank highly even with lower penetration, and different from total gyms, where the United States leads by count in several industry tallies. The United States, for example, can post a lower penetration rate than Norway or Sweden while still having a much larger absolute membership base because of population size. RunRepeat’s chart focuses on percentage participation, not scale. ### How does this compare with other gym-industry tallies? Wellness Creative’s 2026 market report said the United States has about 57,450 gyms, the most of any country, while global gym and health-club counts were estimated at roughly 207,800. (runrepeat.com) That is a separate measure from penetration, but it helps explain why a country can dominate in facilities and still trail smaller countries on per-capita membership. Exercise.com, citing industry sources, said U.S. gym-membership penetration is about 19% in its 2026 roundup. That difference suggests outlets are using different source years, methodologies or definitions, which is common in fitness-industry compilations. ### Why are Norway and Sweden at the top of this chart? RunRepeat’s page did not attach a fresh May 19 explanation to the Nordic rankings. (wellnesscreatives.com) The dataset simply listed Sweden and Norway as the countries with the highest market penetration rates, both at 22.0%. Other industry reports show developed markets often cluster at the high end of gym participation, but the RunRepeat table itself stops at the ranking and percentages. (exercise.com) It does not provide country-specific commentary for Norway, Sweden, India or Indonesia in the excerpt surfaced on May 19. ### Where can readers check the underlying figures? RunRepeat’s gym industry statistics page still hosts the country-by-country penetration table that includes Sweden, Norway, the United States, India and Indonesia. (runrepeat.com) The same page also includes other measures such as top countries by revenue, number of gyms and number of members. As of May 19, the figures being shared publicly trace back to that existing RunRepeat page rather than to a newly posted report. (runrepeat.com) Readers comparing the numbers with newer industry roundups will need to check the source year and methodology used in each dataset.