In the same vein as the street and place names statistics http://qa.poole.ch/ch-roads/ , I've added a page with daily address counts per municipality http://qa.poole.ch/addresses/ch/
As a comparison dataset I'm using the counts from the GWR data, as you can see from the numbers there is obviously a number of caveats that apply:
- the OSM numbers overcount duplicated addresses
- the OSM numbers undercount multiple house numbers in one addr:housenumber tag and the same for address interpolations
The effect of both of these is likely very small, however what is included in the GWR data varies from canton to canton and potentially from municipality to municipality. For example the GWR data for the canton Bern doesn't include housenumbers for auxiliary buildings, however the cantonal dataset that we are using for the import there http://tasks.osm.ch/project/2 , does. On the other hand the GWR data for Dietikon contains numbers for auxiliary buildings, but because they are not actually displayed on the buildings they are not surveyable and (because I mapped the addresses there per pedes) are not included in the OSM data.
With other words you should not be expecting the numbers to match up exactly and further the statistics do not replace the numbers from https://regio-osm.de/ that does a far more in depth analysis.
For convenience sake I've added links to the GWR data in shapefile, geojson and OSM format to the table. We have not planned wholesale imports of the data at this point in time, and outside of smaller areas and fix up it is probably not a good idea in any case (because we have better datasets available at a cantonal level, for example Bern and Zürich).
Simon