Market Intelligence

Map and rank where AI infrastructure can actually scale.

Market scores reflect Gridlocked's view of where AI infrastructure demand is most likely to convert into buildable capacity. The framework weighs power access, fiber depth, land control, water risk, permitting support, demand momentum, and saturation — a higher score means a stronger physical setup, not guaranteed investment upside.

Market scores are directional Gridlocked framework inputs based on public infrastructure, utility, site-control, water, demand, and saturation indicators. Read them as screening signals, not definitive rankings or investment recommendations.

Map View shows the geographic constraint layer. Rankings View compares the same framework scores side by side. Selecting a market on the map loads its full buildability tear sheet.

Market Intelligence Views

Move between geography and ranked market selection without leaving the product.

Market Rankings

Compare market buildability.

Compare data center markets by power, fiber, land, water, policy, demand, and constraint risk.

Search marketsPrimary constraintRisk levelSort

Market Screener15 markets

Constraint-adjusted buildability

Market	Overall	Power	Fiber	Land	Water	Policy	Demand	Risk	Primary Constraint	Market Read-Through
Northern Virginia	94	68	99	54	72	66	100	High	Power availability	The global demand anchor is increasingly limited by substation queues, land scarcity, and political fatigue.
Dallas-Fort Worth	88	84	88	86	71	78	91	Medium	Grid interconnection	A deep hyperscale pipeline with better land economics, though ERCOT volatility keeps power strategy central.
Phoenix	86	78	82	88	45	74	89	High	Water and power	Scale, land, and western demand are compelling, but water optics and generation needs will shape how demand converts into buildable capacity.
Atlanta	83	81	84	78	76	72	86	Medium	Transmission capacity	A pragmatic southeast hub with growing hyperscale relevance and manageable site constraints.
Chicago	80	77	90	66	82	64	81	Medium	Urban infill costs	Enterprise demand and fiber density remain strong, but large campus expansion is more selective.
Columbus	79	80	73	84	78	77	75	Medium	Utility delivery timing	A rising Midwest market with credible land and power story if delivery timelines hold.
Salt Lake City	77	73	78	82	50	76	79	Medium	Water risk	Western latency and business climate are attractive, but cooling strategy matters.
Reno	74	76	70	88	47	75	72	Medium	Water and transmission	Land-rich western relief valve with meaningful infrastructure diligence requirements.
Las Vegas	73	71	76	79	42	70	74	Medium	Water optics	Strong regional connectivity but increasingly sensitive water and cooling narrative.
Austin/San Antonio	72	69	76	74	62	71	78	Medium	ERCOT congestion	Demand is real, but competing load growth and power volatility complicate underwriting.
Kansas City	71	75	69	86	81	73	61	Low	Demand depth	A compelling overflow market where demand formation is the gating item.
Charlotte	70	72	75	68	78	67	70	Low	Site assembly	Financial-services demand and southeast growth help, though campus-scale options are more limited.
Nashville	68	70	66	73	74	69	68	Low	Fiber depth	Fast-growth market with optionality, but less proven for dense hyperscale clustering.
Denver	67	61	77	63	48	65	72	Medium	Water and power	Connectivity and regional demand are useful, while resource constraints limit broad campus growth.
Portland/Hillsboro	66	63	83	58	80	55	71	Medium	Policy friction	Excellent connectivity and legacy presence, with local politics and land availability affecting expansion.

Overall = weighted market buildability score

Power/Fiber/Land/Water/Policy/Demand = directional category scores

Risk = qualitative constraint risk

Market Read-Through = Gridlocked's plain-English interpretation