Montenegro’s first-half tourism numbers were almost unchanged at the aggregate level, but the composition of foreign demand shifted materially. Stronger business from Serbia, the United Kingdom, Germany, Poland and Russia compensated for sharp contractions in Austria, Israel, France and several neighbouring EU markets.
Visitors from Serbia generated 260,548 overnight stays in collective accommodation during the first six months, up from 227,529 a year earlier. The increase of approximately 14.5 per cent confirmed Serbia as Montenegro’s largest individually identified source market.
British visitors generated 159,624 nights, an increase of 7.2 per cent, while German overnight stays rose 10.1 per cent to 120,378. Poland recorded one of the stronger expansions, increasing 20.8 per cent to 82,723 nights.
Russian overnight stays climbed from 50,174 to 68,114, an increase of almost 36 per cent. Bosnia and Herzegovina advanced 12.8 per cent to 72,843 nights, while the Netherlands rose almost 29 per cent to 16,323.
The growth was not universal. Austrian overnight stays fell from 39,073 to 20,958, a contraction of more than 46 per cent. Israeli nights declined 33.3 per cent to 63,743, while France fell 8.5 per cent to 117,055.
Croatian overnight stays decreased from 32,458 to 29,583, and Slovenia declined from 13,227 to 12,384. The weakness in these markets partly offset the stronger performance from Serbia, Britain and Germany.
The figures underline the different commercial value and risk profile of each visitor group. Regional tourists from Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina usually benefit from road access, linguistic familiarity and repeat travel. These markets provide stability but can be sensitive to congestion, border delays and price competition from Greece, Croatia, Albania and Türkiye.
British, German, Polish and Nordic demand depends more heavily on airline capacity, tour operators and direct connections. These markets can support higher hotel occupancy and longer stays, but they are exposed to schedule decisions made by airlines and airports outside Montenegro.
Russia and Israel represent high-value but geopolitically volatile markets. Growth from Russia continues despite constrained European connectivity, while the sharp fall in Israeli stays demonstrates how external security conditions can alter bookings rapidly.
The mix also matters for accommodation investment. Budva’s mass-market and upscale hotels, Tivat’s luxury segment, Kotor’s heritage tourism, Herceg Novi’s regional demand and Ulcinj’s family-oriented market cannot be financed on the assumption that all foreign visitors behave in the same way.
A more resilient tourism strategy would combine dependable regional markets with diversified air connections to northern and western Europe, avoiding excessive dependence on any single country. The first-half figures show that Montenegro achieved stability through market substitution rather than broad-based growth.
