--- title: "Norway: Brønnøysund publishes a phone number" summary: "Brønnøysund. At parity, measured without model spend." canonical_url: https://entitybind.com/coverage/norway last_updated: 2026-10-12 copy: full --- # Norway: Brønnøysund publishes a phone number > Brønnøysund. At parity, measured without model spend. Canonical page: https://entitybind.com/coverage/norway Last updated: 2026-10-12 ## What a file from Norway resolves to The rows that are one company, the matches we would refuse, and the column that decides the rest. Send us the file. We tell you which of its rows are one company, which of the matches you already hold we would not have made, and which rows we will not call — each naming the column of yours that would have settled it. An abstention costs zero, and we write nothing to your systems. - What a file gets right: 5 listed - Gaps named below: 4 - Evidence behind this register: At parity, measured without model spend - Questions answered below: 3 - Instrument: Spend-free A first file from Norway: A few hundred rows, whatever columns they carry. Every row comes back with a decision, the citation behind it and a receipt. [Start free →](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) Self-service. Create your workspace online and verify your email to start matching company records. Free starts with 300 credits and no card. Paid monthly plans are available in workspace Billing; VAT is added where applicable. Usage is tracked without automatic overage charges. [Trust and security](https://entitybind.com/trust) By [James Rooney](https://entitybind.com/about), founder of Entity Bind · Last revised 12 October 2026 ## The register, counted Unique normalised name: 97.78% of the 450,754 corporate forms on Brønnøysund carry a name that is unique once normalised. The United Kingdom baseline is 99.53% of 5,464,811 live companies. Licence: Norwegian Licence for Open Government Data, alongside CC BY 4.0. Open tier: storable and resellable, enforced on the write path. [check a company on the register yourself →](https://data.brreg.no/enhetsregisteret/) · [how this figure and every other one was measured →](https://entitybind.com/accuracy) · [cite it: the five-register census, with a CSV →](https://entitybind.com/research/company-name-uniqueness) A file of bare names cannot beat that census, whatever engine reads it. One sample tells you what your own columns do against it. [Start free →](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) ## What works One line per shape of file, each with the count it was measured over. Send the columns named here and this is what comes back. - A Norwegian organisation number: identifier tier 3,000 of 3,000 on the wide fixture, decided deterministically with zero false binds. - Name-and-postcode arrivals at 2,996 of 3,000, within a point of the UK baseline and measured with no model spend. - Register-supplied contact facts that do not have to be scraped: a website and a telephone number, citable to the register that published them, which is otherwise the hardest kind of fact to cite at all. - Three separate insolvency and dissolution states rather than one flattened status word, which is the difference between a counterparty in voluntary liquidation and one compulsorily dissolved. - Open-licence storage and resale, under NLOD, enforced by the persistence layer rather than by a contract clause. Those counts come off our own fixture. The one that decides your project is the same measurement run on your rows. [Start free →](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) ## What it will not do A limit found in week three of an integration costs more than a limit read here. 01. Names are slightly less discriminating than in Britain: 97.78% against 99.53%. That is a couple of points of ceiling when a name is all you send, not a different order of problem. 02. No live-adjudicated Norwegian recording has been run, so the Norwegian name-tier figures are predictions from the census and the UK-measured conversion — published in advance at around 96 to 97% for name-and-country — rather than measurements. 03. Sole traders are out of scope by construction. Enkeltpersonforetak register under a person's own name, and they are excluded from storage and from every fixture on the same rule that governs people data throughout the product. 04. Norway is Norway. Nothing here generalises to Sweden, Denmark or Finland: Finland's adapter is built and not switched on, Denmark and Sweden are inventory entries rather than measured registers, and no Nordic claim is made from a Norwegian measurement. Internal fixtures only. The historical 2026-08-29 per-tier recording covers 317 GB companies with identifier-rich arrivals seeding the catalogue first; the context tier includes country and registered-town prose. Its legacy replay has no full-prompt-verified calls and cannot certify current calibration. The September 5 CI reports cover 1,176 labelled pairs and 705 records over 250 companies using offline stubs. These are not independent customer holdouts or live production validation; the 99% minimum-input product target remains unmet. Scope is company and organisation identity only — not people, vessels, bank-account ownership, sanctions or emissions. Results may not be used for eligibility decisions about individuals, including employment, credit and tenancy. If one of those gaps decides your project, contact us before integrating. You can create your Free workspace online to inspect your own rows; an assisted first file can compare them with your incumbent’s matches and name the ones we would not have made. [Start free →](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) ## Norway, in detail Registers differ more than engines do. These are the properties of this one that change what your file gets back. Norway is the smallest register in the measured set and the richest schema in the whole inventory. 450,754 corporate forms sit in the Brønnøysund Register Centre's Enhetsregisteret under a universe rule that admits corporate forms only — AS, ASA, ANS, DA, KS, NUF, SA, BA and SE — with sole traders excluded on the same personal-data ground that excludes them in France, which is what makes the Norwegian and British universes comparable at all. On the census, Norway sits close enough to the United Kingdom that the same tier design carries over with a ceiling a couple of points lower: 97.78% of live legal persons have a name that is unique once case, punctuation and legal form are stripped, against 99.53% at Companies House. A Norwegian file of bare names is therefore a workable proposition in a way a French one is not, and a town column still improves it. What makes Brønnøysund unusual is what it publishes rather than how much. It supplies the organisation number, historic names, legal form, website, telephone, structured postal and business addresses, NACE codes, incorporation date, headcount, share capital, a VAT-register flag, and three independent insolvency and dissolution booleans. Two of those are close to unique. It is one of only two registers anywhere in the inventory that publishes a website, and the only one that publishes a telephone number — facts that are otherwise scraped and therefore uncitable. And the three separate insolvency flags are why the record model distinguishes register status from status detail at all: a single status word flattens bankruptcy, voluntary liquidation and compulsory dissolution into one string, and those are materially different states to anyone doing counterparty diligence. The parity measurement: Measured on a run that made no model calls anywhere and therefore bought no adjudicator's verdict — the spend-free instrument. The fixture came from this register's own bulk snapshot, drawn by the same builder that produced the UK's: a repeatable seeded sample that then pulls in every live company sharing a name with a sampled one, so the ambiguity in the fixture is the register's own rather than a thinned sample of it. It covers identifiers, the name-and-postcode tier, retrieval and fragmentation. It does not carry the live-adjudicated name tiers across, and no live-adjudicated rate is claimed for this register until its own recording leg runs. Norway met the contract on every factor — identifier 3,000 of 3,000, name-and-postcode 2,996 of 3,000, wrong-town retrieval 3,000 of 3,000, truncated retrieval above the GB baseline, zero false binds — contributing to the combined 0.999955. ### Where the census comes from - [Enhetsregisteret, Brønnøysund Register Centre](https://data.brreg.no/enhetsregisteret/): The open data service the Norwegian fixture was built from, by the same seeded, sibling-complete builder that produced the UK's. ## The identifier columns a Norway file arrives carrying Most decisive first. Whether an agreeing value settles a pair on its own, or only narrows the field, is answered on the identifier's own page — along with what goes wrong with the column in a real file. - [Company number](https://entitybind.com/identifiers/company-number) (Identifier): A company number names a registration, not a company: 220 of 232 jurisdictions run more than one register, so it decides only once the register is named. - [VAT number](https://entitybind.com/identifiers/vat-number) (Identifier): A VAT group registers several legal entities on one number, so it cannot decide a pair even in principle. Tested here as a tier on 2026-08-29 and refused. ## The other registers we have measured Four jurisdictions, each measured one register at a time. A map shaded in by region would say more and mean less: an adapter with no fixture behind it has no measured quality, and none is quoted for it. - [United Kingdom](https://entitybind.com/coverage/united-kingdom) (5 named gaps): Baseline register, live-adjudicated - [United States](https://entitybind.com/coverage/united-states) (5 named gaps): At parity in part, with the failing factor named - [France](https://entitybind.com/coverage/france) (5 named gaps): At parity, measured without model spend If your file spans more than one of these registers, one sample tells you more than four pages will. [Start free →](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) ## Start with a file from Norway. A Sprint runs over the public API on a copy of your file and writes nothing to your CRM, ERP, MDM or warehouse. The audit pack: twelve files, a receipt per decision, and a report that opens offline. [Start free](https://app.entitybind.com/app?signup=1) · [Plans and prices](https://entitybind.com/pricing) 300 credits. No card. For a guided review of your file, explore [the Merge Safety Sprint](https://entitybind.com/audit-pack). ## Questions about Norway ### How good is Norwegian coverage? Measured, and measured at the United Kingdom's level on everything the spend-free instrument covers: identifier 3,000 of 3,000, name-and-postcode 2,996 of 3,000, wrong-town retrieval 3,000 of 3,000, truncated retrieval above the GB baseline, and zero false binds anywhere in the run. That contributed to a combined parity probability of 0.999955 measured across United Kingdom, United States (Colorado) and EMEA (France and Norway). What is not measured is the live-adjudicated name tier — no Norwegian recording leg has been run — so the name-only figure is a prediction from the census rather than an outcome. ### What does the Norwegian register give you that others do not? A website and a telephone number, published by the register itself. That sounds minor and is not: contact facts are normally scraped, and a scraped fact cannot be cited to an authority. Brønnøysund is one of only two registers in the whole inventory that publishes a website and the only one that publishes a phone number. It also publishes three independent insolvency and dissolution booleans rather than one status word, plus headcount, share capital, NACE codes and structured addresses — the richest schema of any register tested here. ### Does Norwegian coverage extend to the rest of the Nordics? No. Every claim here is per-register. Finland's register adapter is built, verified live and switched off, with no evaluation fixture, so there is no measured quality figure for Finland and none is offered. Denmark and Sweden are inventory entries with adapters and no measurement. Norway was measured because a fixture was built from its own bulk snapshot by the same builder that produced the UK's, and the result is a statement about Norway. --- Entity Bind resolves companies and organisations only. It does not resolve people, vessels, bank-account ownership, sanctions exposure, emissions or geolocation, and its results may not be used for eligibility decisions about individuals, including employment, credit and tenancy. This is the Markdown copy of https://entitybind.com/coverage/norway, assembled from the same data the page renders and carrying every sentence, table row, figure and question the page's main content carries. The HTML page is canonical; it adds the layout, the navigation and the interactive parts (the ask panel, the forms), which a copy can name but not run. Every page on the site, with a line on each: https://entitybind.com/llms.txt.