GCIGlobal City Intelligence
Safety

Safety in Copenhagen

Copenhagen scores high on safety due to strong public trust, low violent-crime context, and reliable institutional response.

Last updated
2026-05-03
Data year
2025
Module score
92/100

Safety score

Personal safety, institutional trust, and resilience signals informed by international safety and crime data.

Safety in Copenhagen92/100

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.

Copenhagen Safety data table
MetricValueContext
Safety score92/100Stable institutional response reinforces the score.
Resident perceptionVery highPedestrian and night-time safety are widely positive.
Watch itemBike theftCommon-sense precautions still useful.

Safety city comparison

A crawlable comparison across every indexed city makes it easy to scan how this module changes between metros.

Safety city comparison table
CityScoreSummary
Copenhagen (this page)92/100Copenhagen scores high on safety due to strong public trust, low violent-crime context, and reliable institutional response.
Singapore95/100Singapore is among the safest cities globally, with very low violent-crime context and strong institutional response.
Tokyo93/100Tokyo scores at the very top globally on safety, with very low violent-crime context, strong institutions, and high resident perception of safety.
Sydney87/100Sydney is among the safer large global cities, with low violent-crime context and strong institutional response.
Toronto84/100Toronto is among the safer large North American cities, with low violent-crime context and solid institutional response.
Berlin82/100Berlin has solid safety with neighborhood variation. Violent-crime context is comparatively low; opportunistic risks concentrate in transit and night-life areas.
London79/100London has solid safety with neighborhood variation. Violent-crime context is comparatively low; opportunistic risks are concentrated in transit and tourist hubs.
Paris78/100Paris has solid overall safety, with neighborhood variation and tourist-area opportunistic risks more visible than violent crime.
New York74/100New York is mid-pack on safety: violent-crime context has improved over decades but property and incident pressure remain present in dense areas.

Explanation

Safety scoring blends violent-crime context, perceived safety, and institutional response capacity. Trust and reliability raise the score even where opportunistic risks exist.

Read this module with the main city profile because single-topic pages can miss tradeoffs. A city with a high energy score can still have housing pressure, and a city with strong opportunity can still carry health exposure risk.

Sources

These pages use trusted institutional references for methodology and context. Mock values are typed and ready to be replaced by API-backed city datasets without changing route structure.

Continue exploring

These links connect module pages back to city, ranking, and sibling topic paths with crawlable href values.

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.

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.