The power trading dynamics in Romania, Hungary, and Serbia are increasingly defined by the strategic management of portfolios rather than traditional arbitrage opportunities. This evolution reflects a broader trend where companies with extensive generation, supply, and balancing capabilities are reaping the most significant rewards. As regional electricity prices align more closely, the focus has shifted from speculative trading to optimizing short-term operations and managing congestion.
In Romania, the energy market is dominated by Hidroelectrica, which reported a net profit of RON 3.303 billion in 2025 despite challenges posed by weaker hydrological conditions. The company maintained a robust gross electricity production of 12,215 GWh, underscoring its position as a leading player due to its low-cost hydro generation and significant wholesale selling capacity. Electrica also plays a vital role, achieving a net profit of RON 1.219 billion for the same year and supplying 7.3 TWh to the retail market, securing a market share of 14.73%. Additionally, OMV Petrom‘s gas-fired plant at Brazi contributed 4.7 TWh in 2025, enhancing the company’s integrated gas-and-power optimization strategy.
The depth of Romania’s exchange and bilateral market architecture is noteworthy. The OPCOM platform recorded 15.7 TWh traded on its day-ahead market in 2025 with a base price of €108.16/MWh. Beyond spot trading, Romania’s bilateral flex mechanism accounted for an additional 13.88 TWh, with further volumes traded through PC-OTC and CM-OTC mechanisms. This multifaceted contracting ecosystem allows utilities to optimize various aspects such as shape and risk management.
Hungary’s market is characterized by the dominance of MVM Group, which reported an EBITDA of HUF 478 billion in H1 2025. The wholesale division was particularly active, selling 19,331 GWh of electricity while generating net sales revenue of HUF 1,418.6 billion. MVM’s retail operations added another 12,040 GWh sold during the same period, reinforcing its position as a vertically integrated entity that controls procurement and customer relations across regional markets.
The exchange liquidity in Hungary is considerable but best understood through monthly snapshots from HUPX. In March 2025 alone, HUPX Spot traded approximately 3.67 million MWh overall, including significant volumes on day-ahead and intraday markets. Despite this depth, MVM’s extensive portfolio continues to define market dynamics significantly more than smaller independent players like ALTEO.
In Serbia, the energy landscape presents a different picture where the exchange has gained relevance but remains heavily influenced by EPS, the state utility that reported revenues of RSD 442.6 billion in contracts with customers for 2024 and a net profit of RSD 24.4 billion. EPS’s activities encompass sales to households and industrial customers while also engaging in exchange transactions and foreign-market sales.
EFT Group, while not dominating domestically as EPS does, stands out as a significant independent trader operating across multiple European exchanges and delivering around 18 TWh annually to customers. This positions EFT as an essential player within Serbia’s corridor market framework that balances utility dominance with opportunities for regional traders.
The liquidity metrics for Serbia’s exchange (SEEPEX) indicate growth; December 2025 saw nearly 496 thousand MWh traded with an average monthly volume nearing half a million MWh over twelve months—equivalent to about 20% of national electricity consumption in 2024—highlighting its increasing importance despite lower transparency compared to Romania.
A notable trend across these three markets is price convergence; average day-ahead prices were recorded at approximately €108.17/MWh in Romania, €108.51/MWh in Hungary, and €108.10/MWh in Serbia for 2025—indicating remarkably narrow spreads historically speaking. This shift suggests that traditional trading strategies based on geographical price differentials have diminished in effectiveness as market participants pivot towards managing hourly shapes and balancing needs amidst fluctuating renewable outputs.
This transition illustrates why Romania is perceived as having the most comprehensive power trading ecosystem among these nations with its diverse liquidity sources and robust commercial actors like Hidroelectrica and Electrica leading the charge on generation-backed optionality and supply scale respectively. Conversely, Hungary remains centralized around MVM’s influence while Serbia offers unique opportunities for niche traders amid its evolving market structure.
The comparative analysis highlights that while all three markets exhibit liquidity conducive to trading activities, their operational frameworks differ significantly—Romania leads with broad liquidity options; Hungary’s structure favors centralized control; whereas Serbia presents both utility-centric characteristics alongside openings for regional trading initiatives.
