1. 2019 PROFITABILITY OF
COWORKING SPACES
SELECTED VISUALS FROM THE FINAL
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY RESULTS
GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
THE CONDUCTION OF THE SURVEY WAS SUPPORTED BY READ MORE AT BIT.LY/2019PROFIT

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
REVENUE STREAMS & EXPENSES OF COWORKING SPACES
COMPARISON OF PROFITABILITY OF ALL COWORKING SPACES
AGES OF COWORKING SPACES AT BREAK-EVEN POINT
COMPARISON OF PROFIT MARGINS OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
BACKGROUND OF THE 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
............................................... 3
....................................... 6
...................................................... 16
......... 18
............................................ 22
MORE STATISTICS ARE AVAILABLE AT COWORKINGSTATISTICS.COM

3. REVENUE STREAMS OF COWORKING SPACES BY YEAR OF SURVEY
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
A DECREASED PERCENTAGE DOES NOT INDICATE A DECREASE IN ABSOLUTE REVENUE; RATHER, IT INDICATES A DECREASE RELATIVE TO OTHER TYPES OF REVENUE.
3
2019 2018 2017 2016
2%2%2%2% 1%1%2%1%
1%2%
2%2% 1%1%
2%1%
2%1%
1%1%
3%2%
4%
3%
8%8%
8%7%
9%10%
10%
11%
17%18%
27%30%
16%18%
10%11%
40%36%32%31%
RENTING DESKS
COMBINED MEMBERSHIP PLANS
RENTING PRIVATE OFFICES
RENTING MEETING SPACES
RENTING EVENT & CLASS SPACES
VIRTUAL OFFICE SERVICES
SPONSORSHIPS
SALE OF FOOD & DRINKS
SALE OF TICKETS TO INTERNAL EVENTS
PUBLIC SUPPORT
OTHER
BASED ON THE ARITHMETIC MEAN
WITHOUTN.A.

4. 4
WITHOUTN.A.
RESPONSESFROMCOWORKINGSPACEFOUNDERS.OWNERSOR(EMPLOYED)OPERATORS.
REVENUE STREAMS COMPARED BY PROFITABILITY: 2019 OVERVIEW
PROFITABLE ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE
2%2%2%
1%
2%
0%
4%1%
1%
1%2%
1%
1%1%
1%
2%2%4%
9%7%6%
11%10%12%
27%
25%
35%
8%14%
10%
34%33%
27%
RENTING DESKS
COMBINED MEMBERSHIP PLANS
RENTING PRIVATE OFFICES
RENTING MEETING SPACES
RENTING EVENT & CLASS SPACES
VIRTUAL OFFICE SERVICES
SPONSORSHIPS
SALE OF FOOD & DRINKS
SALE OF TICKETS TO INTERNAL EVENTS
PUBLIC SUPPORT
OTHER
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEYBASED ON THE ARITHMETIC MEAN
ZERO LOSS

5. EXPENSES OF COWORKING SPACES BY YEAR OF SURVEY
A DECREASED PERCENTAGE DOES NOT INDICATE A DECREASE IN ABSOLUTE EXPENSES; RATHER, IT INDICATES A DECREASE RELATIVE TO OTHER TYPES OF EXPENSES.
5
2019 2018 2017 2016
2 %2 %2 %3 %
5 %5 %5 %5 %
6 %6 %5 %6 %
4 %
5 %4 %
5 %
5 %5 %5 %
6 %
7 %6 %7 %6 %
13 %
16 %17 %
17 %
15 %
15 %17 %14 %
43 %40 %38 %37 %
RENT OF LOCATION
OPERATING COSTS
WAGES FOR STAFF
MAINTENANCE
WAGES FOR OWNERS
EXTERNAL MARKETING
EQUIPMENT
FOOD & DRINKS
OTHER*
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
PLEASE NOTE:
THIS CHART SHOWS THE RELATIVE PERCENTAGE OF
PARTICULAR TYPES OF EXPENSES COMPARED TO OTHER TYPES
WITHIN THE SAME (GROUP OF) COWORKING SPACES. IT
DOESN'T NECESSARILY INFER ANY CONCLUSION ABOUT THE
ABSOLUTE EXPENSES.
THE SHARE OF EXPENSES FOR RENT HAS SHRUNK COMPARED
TO THE PREVIOUS YEARS. THIS IS DUE TO A HIGHER SHARE OF
COWORKING SPACES THAT EITHER OWN THEIR LOCATION OR
CLOSED A MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH LANDLORDS. IN
ADDITION, THE SHARE OF BIGGER COWORKING SPACES HAS
INCREASED OVER THE YEARS, AND THOSE COWORKING
SPACES PAY RELATIVELY MORE FOR STAFF.
BASED ON THE ARITHMETIC MEAN

6. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND...
THE FOLLOWING CHARTS DEPICT THE PROFITABILITY OF COWORKING SPACES WITHIN THE PAST TWELVE
MONTHS RELATIVE TO PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTICS OF A COWORKING SPACE. MANY OF THESE
CHARTS ILLUSTRATE THE STRENGTH OF A (LINEAR) CORRELATION BETWEEN A CHARACTERISTIC &
PROFITABILITY; THERE ARE ALSO NONLINEAR CORRELATIONS THAT CAN BE DETECTED. HOWEVER, IT IS
IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHARACTERISTIC DID NOT NECESSARILY CAUSE THE
DIFFERENCE!
THERE IS USUALLY NO SINGLE CHARACTERISTIC THAT AFFECTS PROFITABILITY OVERALL (PERHAPS WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF NUMBER OF MEMBERS); RATHER, A COMBINATION IS REQUIRED FOR SUCH AN
EFFECT, AND NOT ALL CAN BE EXAMINED IN A QUANTITATIVE SURVEY. SOME CHARACTERISTICS ARE
AFFECTED BY A BROADER BACKGROUND THAT IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO, BUT IS REFLECTED IN THE
BUSINESS OF RUNNING A COWORKING SPACE.
ALL RESULTS ARE ROUNDED. HENCE, A SUM OF VALUES WITHIN A GROUP IS SOMETIMES LOWER OR
HIGHER THAN 100%.
PAGE 62019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY

7. 7
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
2012 2013 2014 2016 2017 2018 2019
26%25%26%23%
33%36%38%
32%33%35%41%
34%32%23%
43%42%40%36%33%32%39%
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF PROFITABILITY BY YEAR OF SURVEY
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
2012 2013 2014 2016 2017 2018 2019
26%29%30%34%40%51%51%
SHARE OF COWORKING SPACES THAT ARE ≤ 1 YEAR OLD
PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY

8. 2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
≤ 6 7 - 12 13 - 24 25 - 36 37 - 48 49 - 60 61 - 84 > 84
10%
19%19%17%24%32%33%37% 19%
28%25%
39%28%
29%
41%40%
71%
53%56%
44%48%
39%
27%23%
SHARE OF COWORKING SPACES BY AGE
750 %
1500 %
2250 %
3000 %
≥ 6 7 - 12 13 - 24 25 - 36 37 - 48 49 - 60 61 - 84 > 84
9%8%7%14%13%
23%
10%16%
MONTHS
MONTHS
PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 8
WITHOUTN.A.
BY AGE OF COWORKING SPACE
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
PROFITABILITYOFCOWORKINGSPACES

9. BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS PER COWORKING SPACE
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
< 25 25-49 50-99 100-199 200 & MORE MEMBERS
9%10%
24%27%
41% 15%
36%
29%
40%
35% 76%
54%47%
33%
24%
SHARE OF COWORKING SPACES BY NO. OF MEMBERS
750 %
1500 %
2250 %
3000 %
< 25 25-49 50-99 100-199 200 & MORE MEMBERS
18%15%22%18%
28%
WITHOUTN.A.
9PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
PROFITABILITYOFCOWORKINGSPACES

10. 2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
FOR PROFIT NON-PROFIT
27%26%
46%
29%
27%
45%
BY BUSINESS MODEL
SHARE OF COWORKING SPACES BY BUSINESS MODEL
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
FOR PROFIT NON-PROFIT OTHER OR N.A.
6%12%
83%
PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 10
WITHOUTN.A.
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
PROFITABILITYOFCOWORKINGSPACES

11. PROFITABILITYOFCOWORKINGSPACES
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
YES NO
30%24%
42%
27%
28%
49%
BY REQUIREMENT OF INDEPENDENT COWORKING SPACE PROFITABILITY*
SHARE OF COWORKING SPACES WITH THAT REQUIREMENT
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
YES NO DON'T KNOW
8%29%
64%
PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 11
WITHOUTN.A.
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
WITHOUTN.A.
*IN ORDER TO RUN THE ENTIRE OR
PARENT BUSINESS SUCCESSFULLY

12. EXPANSION PLANS FOR 2019 BY PROFITABILITY STATUS
PROFITABLE ZERO LOSS, ZERO PROFIT UNPROFITABLE 12
WITHOUTN.A.
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
EXPANDING INSIDE THE CURRENT SPACE
MOVING TO A LARGER LOCATION
OPENING (AN)OTHER NEW LOCATION(S)
0 12.5 25 37.5 50
20%
6%
28%
32%
8%
37%
46%
11%
28%
YES, WE WILL EXPAND
0 20 40 60 80
48%
65%
72% OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF UNPROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF COWORKING SPACES WITHOUT PROFIT OR LOSS
OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF UNPROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF UNPROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF COWORKING SPACES WITHOUT PROFIT OR LOSS
OF COWORKING SPACES WITHOUT PROFIT OR LOSS
OF UNPROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
OF COWORKING SPACES WITHOUT PROFIT OR LOSS
MULTIPLE RESPONSES WERE ALLOWED:
PROFITABILITYOFCOWORKINGSPACES

13. INCOME* OF FOUNDERS, OWNER OR SELF-EMPLOYED OPERATORS BY PROFITABILITY
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
PROFITABLE ZERO PROFIT - ZERO LOSS UNPROFITABLE
21%23%
8%
58%
40%
51%
20%
37%42%
ABOVE AVERAGE AVERAGE BELOW AVERAGE 13
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
PROFITABLE ZERO PROFIT - ZERO LOSS UNPROFITABLE
19%29%23%
65%46%62%
16%25%15%
INCOME* OF EMPLOYED OPERATORS OR SPACE MANAGERS BY PROFITABILITY
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
INCOME* OF PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR COWORKING SPACES
*COMPAREDTOTHECOSTOFLIVINGINTHEIRRESPECTIVECOUNTRIES.
PLEASENOTE:THELARGERTHECOWORKINGSPACE,THEMORELIKELYTHE
QUESTIONNAIREISRESPONDEDBYEMPLOYEESOFACOWORKINGSPACE.

14. INCOME* OF PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR COWORKING SPACES
INCOME* OF FOUNDERS, OWNERS OR SELF-EMPLOYED OPERATORS BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
UP TO 49 MEMBERS 50-99 100-199 200 & MORE MEMBERS
6%8%13%19%
46%47%
57%48%
48%45%31%33%
ABOVE AVERAGE AVERAGE BELOW AVERAGE 14
*COMPAREDTOTHECOSTOFLIVINGINTHEIRRESPECTIVECOUNTRIES.
PLEASENOTE:THELARGERTHECOWORKINGSPACE,THEMORELIKELYTHE
QUESTIONNAIREISRESPONDEDBYEMPLOYEESOFACOWORKINGSPACE.
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
UP TO 49 MEMBERS 50-99 100-199 200 & MORE MEMBERS
11%
30%25%24%
52%
57%65%53%
37%
14%10%22%
INCOME* OF EMPLOYED OPERATORS OR SPACE MANAGERS BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY

15. INCOME* OF OWNERS OF COWORKING SPACES**
FEMALE
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
< 50 MEMBERS ≥ 50 MEMBERS
14%22%
57%53%
29%26%
ABOVE AVERAGE AVERAGE BELOW AVERAGE
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
< 50 MEMBERS ≥ 50 MEMBERS
8%
16%
48%46%
44%38%
MALE
BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
18%
55%
28%
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
13%
46%
41%
BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS
15
WITHOUTN.A.
* COMPARED TO THE COST OF LIVING IN THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES ** FOUNDERS, OWNERS OR SELF-EMPLOYED OPERATORS
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY

16. 2019 ALL COWORKING SPACES 2018 ALL COWORKING SPACES
17%13%
20%
19%
24%
29%
38%40%
UP TO 6 MONTHS
7-12 MONTHS
13-24 MONTHS
OLDER THAN 24 MONTHS
AGES OF COWORKING SPACES AT BREAK-EVEN POINT
ARITHMETIC MEAN
5% TRIMMED MEAN
13.5 MONTHS
12.2 MONTHS
16
MEDIAN10 MONTHS
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
A COWORKING SPACE BREAKS EVEN WHEN THEY DON'T MAKE ANY LOSSES FOR THE FIRST TIME. THUS, UNPROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED.
WHEN WE FIRST INTRODUCED THIS QUESTION IN THE 2017 SURVEY WE ACCIDENTALLY ONLY CONSIDERED COWORKING SPACES THAT HAD MADE ZERO LOSSES AND ZERO PROFIT DUE TO A NON-
WORKING FILTER, FOR THIS REASON, THE 2017 RESULTS ARE NOT SHOWN.
14.9 MONTHS
13.3 MONTHS
11 MONTHS

17. PAGE 172019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
PLEASE NOTE: THE FOLLOWING CHARTS ONLY INCLUDE COWORKING SPACES THAT
HAD BEEN PROFITABLE WITHIN THE PAST TWELVE MONTHS.
2500 %
5000 %
7500 %
10000 %
26%
32%
43%
PROFITABLE
ZERO
UNPROFITABLE
PLEASE ALSO KEEP IN MIND:
THE PROFIT MARGIN IS A RELATIVE VALUE AND DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING
ABOUT THE PROFIT IN ABSOLUTE NUMBER!!!
FURTHERMORE, THERE IS USUALLY NO ONE CHARACTERISTIC THAT CAN AFFECT THE PROFIT
MARGIN OVERALL; RATHER, A COMBINATION IS REQUIRED FOR SUCH AN EFFECT, AND NOT ALL CAN
BE COLLECTED IN A QUANTITATIVE SURVEY. SOME CHARACTERISTICS ARE AFFECTED BY A BROADER
BACKGROUND THAT IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO, BUT IS REFLECTED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING
A COWORKING SPACE.
COMPARISON OF ANNUAL PROFIT MARGINS
OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES

18. ANNUAL PROFIT MARGINS OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
18 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
GENERAL RESULT
625 % 1250 % 1875 % 2500 %
17.4%
ALL PROFITABLE
COWORKING
SPACES 2019
MEDIANMEAN
15%19.4%
5% TRIMMED MEAN
PROFIT MARGIN (5% TRIMMED MEAN)
RESPONSESWITHOUTN.A.
ANDEXCLUDINGCOWORKINGSPACESWITHAMARGINOF≤0%&>100%

19. ANNUAL PROFIT MARGINS OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
19 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
625 %
1250 %
1875 %
2500 %
≤ 12 MONTHS 13 - 36 MONTHS 37 - 60 MONTHS > 60 MONTHS
14%
20%19%18%
DISTRIBUTION OF COWORKING SPACES WITH A PROFIT MARGIN ABOVE 0%
1250 %
2500 %
3750 %
5000 %
≤ 12 MONTHS 13 - 36 MONTHS 37 - 60 MONTHS > 60 MONTHS
29%23%34%
14%
BY AGE OF COWORKING SPACE
MEAN 18% - MEDIAN: 18% MEAN: 22% - MEDIAN: 20% MEAN: 21% - MEDIAN: 20% MEAN: 15% - MEDIAN: 10%
PROFIT MARGIN (5% TRIMMED MEAN)
RESPONSESWITHOUTN.A.
ANDEXCLUDINGCOWORKINGSPACESWITHAMARGINOF≤0%&>100%

20. 20 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
625 %
1250 %
1875 %
2500 %
< 50 MEMBERS 50 - 99 MEMBERS 100 - 199 MEMBERS ≥ 200 MEMBERS
17%16%16%
22%
DISTRIBUTION OF COWORKING SPACES WITH A PROFIT MARGIN ABOVE 0%
1250 %
2500 %
3750 %
5000 %
< 50 MEMBERS 50 - 99 MEMBERS 100 - 199 MEMBERS ≥ 200 MEMBERS
26%18%25%32%
BY NUMBER OF MEMBERS
MEAN 25% - MEDIAN: 20% MEAN: 16% - MEDIAN: 10% MEAN: 17% - MEDIAN: 14% MEAN: 17% - MEDIAN: 15%
PROFIT MARGIN (5% TRIMMED MEAN)
ANNUAL PROFIT MARGINS OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
RESPONSESWITHOUTN.A.
ANDEXCLUDINGCOWORKINGSPACESWITHAMARGINOF≤0%&>100%

21. 21 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
625 %
1250 %
1875 %
2500 %
< 500 SQ M 500 - < 1000 SQ M 1000 - < 2000 SQ M ≥ 2000 SQ M
15%17%
14%
20%
DISTRIBUTION OF COWORKING SPACES WITH A PROFIT MARGIN ABOVE 0%
1250 %
2500 %
3750 %
5000 %
< 500 SQ M 500 - < 1000 SQ M 1000 - < 2000 SQ M ≥ 2000 SQ M
17%20%14%
49%
BY SIZE OF A COWORKING SPACE IN SQUARE METERS (1 SQ M = 10.7639 SQ FT)
MEAN 22% - MEDIAN: 20% MEAN: 15% - MEDIAN: 13% MEAN: 19% - MEDIAN: 15% MEAN: 16% - MEDIAN: 15%
PROFIT MARGIN (5% TRIMMED MEAN)
ANNUAL PROFIT MARGINS OF PROFITABLE COWORKING SPACES
RESPONSESWITHOUTN.A.
ANDEXCLUDINGCOWORKINGSPACESWITHAMARGINOF≤0%&>100%

22. 2019 GLOBAL
COWORKING
SURVEY
22
THANKS TO OUR MAIN SUPPORTERS:
ESSENSYS.TECH
"Essensys is a simple, easy to use
software platform that helps you
manage your workspace from lead to
cash and everything in between.
Workspaces can attract and retain
customers, grow additional income
streams and gain business insight to
make quicker decisions. We focus on
ensuring that your workspace can
deliver the best customer experience.”
YARDI.COM
The all-new Yardi KUBE is the most
comprehensive workspace
management platform. Drive top line
revenue, reduce costs and efficiently
grow your Coworking space while
delivering a phenomenal member
experience.
THE MAIN SUPPORTERS LISTED ABOVE HELPED TO DISTRIBUTE THE SURVEY AND FINANCIALLY SUPPORTED THE OVERALL
PROMOTION OF THE SURVEY.
OUR DISTRIBUTION PARTNERS & REGIONAL PARTNERS HELPED TO DISTRIBUTE THE SURVEY ON A GLOBAL OR REGIONAL SCALE.
OFFICIAL SUPPORTERS HELPED TO DISTRIBUTE THE SURVEY WITHIN THEIR OWN COWORKING SPACE NETWORKS.
"Nexudus is a leading white-label
platform to help coworking space
operators with their day-to-day tasks.
Today, hundreds of spaces around the
world use Nexudus to spend less time
typing and chasing invoices, keeping
their communities engaged and up-
to-date, or controlling who is in and
out of the space and how it is used.
Nexudus is made for and by their
active community of users."
NEXUDUS.COM

23. THANKS TO OUR DISTRIBUTION PARTNERS:
THANKS TO OUR REGIONAL PARTNERS & OFFICIAL SUPPORTERS:

24. MORE STATISTICS
WOULD YOU LIKE TO
SUPPORT THE
GLOBAL
COWORKING
SURVEY
AND RECEIVE MORE
STATISTICS?
YES, GIMME MORE
STATS!
PAGE 24GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY PAGE 24

25. A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT BY
RECEIVING TOO MANY EMAILS FROM STUDENTS ABOUT COWORKING RESEARCH?
ADD COWORKINGLIBRARY.COM
TO YOUR FAQ PAGE.

26. (ARITHMETIC) MEAN, 5% TRIMMED MEAN, MEDIAN…
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY DIFFERENT AVERAGE VALUES? ISN’T THERE A SIMPLER WAY?
SURE THERE IS! BUT REDUCING A SKEWED DEVELOPMENT TO A SINGLE VALUE WOULD NOT PROVIDE AN ACCURATE REFLECTION
OF THE COWORKING SPACE LANDSCAPE, WHICH HAS BECOME MORE DIVERSE IN RECENT YEARS. IN FACT, THE VALUES
PRESENTED HEREIN ARE THREE OF DOZENS OF STATISTICAL MEASURES; SO, WE ARE STILL KEEPING IT QUITE SIMPLE. THE
(ARITHMETIC) MEAN IS THE MOST COMMON AVERAGE TO REPORT CENTRAL TENDENCIES. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT ROBUST IF IT IS
INFLUENCED BY OUTLIERS (EXTREME CASES, WHICH ARE MUCH LARGER OR SMALLER THAN MOST OF THE OTHERS). FOR EXAMPLE,
THINK OF AN UNEQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME, WHERE 10% OF PEOPLE IN YOUR COUNTRY “EARN” 90% OF ALL INCOME. IF YOU
TOOK THE MEAN OF THAT INCOME, THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WOULD SEE A HUGE GAP BETWEEN THE MEAN VALUE AND THE
AMOUNT IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS. THUS, THESE NUMBERS UNFORTUNATELY WOULD NOT REFLECT THEIR REALITY. THE
COWORKING MARKET IS, OF COURSE, NOT THAT UNEQUAL. HOWEVER, THERE ARE COWORKING SPACES (CHAINS) THAT CAN BE
IDENTIFIED AS OUTLIERS AND ARE MUCH BIGGER THAN THE MAJORITY OF OTHER COWORKING SPACES. THEREFORE WE ONLY
HIGHLIGHT THE (ARITHMETIC) MEAN WHEN PRESENTING RESTRICTED SCALES, SUCH AS AGE, BECAUSE LIFE IS STILL LIMITED, OR IN
STAR RATINGS (1-10). FOR OPEN, UNLIMITED SCALES WE PREFER THE 5% TRIMMED MEAN. IT CUTS THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST 5%
OF CASES, AND REFLECTS THE AVERAGE REALITY MUCH BETTER THAN THE ARITHMETIC MEAN IN THOSE CASES - WE CAN ALSO
AVOID TYPOS IN THE CASE THAT A PARTICIPANT ACCIDENTALLY ENTERS TOO MANY FIGURES. THE MEDIAN SEPARATES THE UPPER
HALF FROM THE LOWER HALF (IT IS SIMPLY THE VALUE IN THE MIDDLE). IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT MOST STATISTICS
PRESENTED HEREIN ARE GROUPED, AND PRESENT THEIR SHARE TO REFLECT THE WHOLE REALITY.
HOW TO READ THE STATISTICS?
PAGE 262019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY PAGE 26

27. HOW ARE THE (ARITHMETIC) MEAN, 5% TRIMMED MEAN, AND MEDIAN CALCULATED?
THE (ARITHMETIC) MEAN IS THE SUM OF A COLLECTION OF NUMBERS DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF VALUES IN THE
COLLECTION. CONFUSED? IMAGINE YOU HAVE TEN NUMBERS… NOW ADD THEM UP, AND THEN DIVIDE BY TEN:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 9 + 19 = 58/10 = 5.8
THE 5% TRIMMED MEAN FIRST REMOVES THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST 5% OF A COLLECTION OF NUMBERS, SUMS THE REST,
AND DIVIDES THIS TOTAL BY THE NUMBER OF VALUES IN THE COLLECTION:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 9 + 19 = 38/8 = 4.75 ≈ 4.8
THE MEDIAN IS THE MIDDLE NUMBER OF A COLLECTION OF VALUES. IT DIVIDES THE UPPER HALF BY THE LOWER HALF. IN
THIS CASE, WE HAVE AN EVEN NUMBER OF VALUES (TWO MIDDLE NUMBERS), WHICH ARE SUMED AND THEN DIVIDED. THIS
GIVES A FULLY TRUNCATED OR TRIMMED MEAN:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 9 + 19 = (4 + 5)/2 = 4.5
SIDE NOTE: THE GREATER THE DIFFERENCE AMONG THE VALUES, THE GREATER THE COLLECTION OF UNEQUALLY
DISTRIBUTED VALUES. IF YOU’D LIKE TO CONSIDER ONLY A SINGLE NUMBER, GO WITH THE 5% TRIMMED MEAN.
HOWEVER, IT'S BETTER TO USE THE SHARE OF GROUPS PRESENTED IN THE CHARTS.
HOW TO READ THE STATISTICS?
PAGE 272019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY PAGE 27

28. PAGE 282019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY PAGE 28
WHAT DOES 'NUMBER OF INHABITANTS LOCAL TO A COWORKING SPACE' EXACTLY MEAN?
PARTICIPANTS HAVE RESPONDED TO THE QUESTION "HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN THE CITY,
TOWN OR VILLAGE WHERE YOUR COWORKING SPACE IS LOCATED?" IT WOULD BE QUITE LONG
TO WRITE 'NUMBER OF INHABITANTS OF THE CITY, TOWN OR VILLAGE WHERE A COWORKING
SPACE IS LOCATED'.
WHY ARE '0' OR 'N.A.' ENTRIES SOMETIMES EXCLUDED?
THIS IS A FILTER METHOD TO EXCLUDE ENTRIES THAT EITHER DO NOT MAKE SENSE, SUCH AS
COWORKING SPACES WITH A SIZE OF ZERO SQUARE METERS. OR WE EXCLUDE ENTRIES THAT
THE SURVEY SYSTEM MEANT TO CATEGORIZE AS "NOT AVAILABLE" = "-99", BUT USED THE CODE
"0" INSTEAD. THIS ONLY MINIMALLY IMPACTS THE RESULTS. FOR THIS REASON, SOME RESULTS
LOOK VERY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT COMPARED TO RESULTS IN THE PAST. THE FILTER METHOD IS
MENTIONED ON EACH SLIDE.
ABOUT PARTICULAR CATEGORIES

29. WHAT DOES "COWORKING SPACES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO RUN AN INDEPENDENTLY PROFITABLE
COWORKING SPACE BUSINESS" MEAN?
MANY COWORKING SPACES ARE RAN AS SIDE-BUSINESSES. SOME ARE RAN BY SELF-EMPLOYED
OPERATORS WHO STILL HAVE ANOTHER JOB. IN THESE CASES, COWORKING SPACES OFTEN DON'T NEED
TO BE INDEPENDENTLY PROFITABLE, INSTEAD OPERATORS MAY PROFIT FROM A WIDER RANGE OF
CLIENTS AND INCREASE THEIR INCOME IN THEIR MAIN JOB OR REDUCE THEIR EXPENSES BY RENTING
DESKS. IN SOME CASES, COWORKING SPACES ARE RAN AS A PART OF A BIGGER BUSINESS MODEL, E.G. IN
HOTELS, IN ORDER TO INCREASE OTHER REVENUE STREAMS OF THE HOTEL. THERE ARE NUMEROUS
EXAMPLES, BUT THEY OFTEN SHARE THE COMMON FACTOR THAT SUCH COWORKING SPACES DO NOT
HAVE TO BE PROFITABLE ON THEIR OWN. WE FILTER THESE COWORKING SPACES ACCORDING TO SUCH
CATEGORIES IN PARTICULAR QUESTIONS.
2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
ABOUT PARTICULAR CATEGORIES

30. BACKGROUND
PAGE 302019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY PAGE 30
MEASURING & SEPARATING SYSTEM:
WE LIKE AND RESPECT DIVERSITY, HOWEVER WE NEEDED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS TO AVOID
REPEATING "TRANSLATIONS" ON COUNTLESS SLIDES:
• RESULTS ARE SHOWN IN THE METRIC SYSTEM IF NOT STATED OTHERWISE:
E.G. 1 SQUARE METER = 10.7639 SQUARE FEET
• A POINT IS USED AS A DECIMAL SEPARATOR & A COMMA FOR MARKING NUMBERS HIGHER THAN ONE
THOUSAND OR MORE: E.G. 20.7 MEMBERS = 20,7 MEMBERS OR 1,899.34€ = €1.899,34
HOW IS THE GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY FINANCED?
THE GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY IS FINANCED THROUGH TWO SOURCES. FIRSTLY, THE MAIN
SUPPORTERS, AS SHOWN IN THE PUBLISHED MATERIAL, PROVIDE THE FINANCES, WHICH ENABLE US TO
PROMOTE THE SURVEY. THEY ALSO ALLOW A BASIC ANALYSIS WHICH IS AVAILABLE FOR FREE. WE ARE VERY
GRATEFUL TO THEM! THEY DO NOT INFLUENCE THE ANALYSIS OR THE RESULTS. A MUCH MORE DETAILED
ANALYSIS TAKES SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TIME, BUT CATERS TO A SMALLER AUDIENCE. SOUNDS LIKE A BAD
CORRELATION, RIGHT? FOR THAT REASON, THE SURVEY ANALYSIS IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE PEOPLE WHO
PURCHASE THE REPORTS. BUT CRUCIAL FINDINGS ARE ALSO PUBLISHED IN ARTICLES, FREE OF COST. THANKS
TO EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTED THE GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY BY PURCHASING THESE REPORTS, BY
DISTRIBUTING THE SURVEY AND ESPECIALLY BY TAKING THE SURVEY!

31. BACKGROUND OF THE 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
THE 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY WAS ACTIVE ONLINE FROM JANUARY 24 - MARCH 18, 2019. THE FINAL RESULTS
ARE ANALYZED USING IBM SPSS, AND ARE CHECKED USING QUALITY STANDARDS TO REMOVE BOTS OR FAKE
PARTICIPANTS. THOSE PEOPLE ARE NOT CONSIDERED IN THE ANALYSIS NOR IN THE COUNTING OF PARTICIPANTS.
PARTICIPANTS:
2019: 2668 ❖ 2018: 1980 ❖ 2017: 1876 ❖ 2016: 1679 ❖ 2014: 1270 ❖ 2013: 1206 ❖ 2012: 913
BY GROUPS IN 2019:
COWORKING SPACES (OWNERS, FOUNDERS, OPERATORS OR STAFF MEMBERS): N=1240
MEMBERS: N=879 - PLANNED OR FUTURE COWORKING SPACES: N=137
REMAINING PARTICIPANTS ARE PRIMARILY FORMER COWORKING SPACE MEMBERS
OR PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER WORKED IN A COWORKING SPACE.
THE GLOBAL RESULTS OF THIS REPORT ARE BASED ON THE PARTICIPANTS
WHO REPRESENT COWORKING SPACES (N=1240).
© 2019 DESKMAG - CARSTEN FOERTSCH
IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO SELL THIS MATERIAL OR ANY CONTENT OF THE SLIDES.
INTERESTED IN REGULAR UPDATES RELATING TO THE GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY?
JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER!
2019 PROFITABILITY OF COWORKING SPACES
SELECTED VISUALS FROM THE FINAL 2019 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY RESULTS
MORE STATISTICS ARE AVAILABLE ON COWORKINGSTATISTICS.COM