Global Wealth Report 2013

Research Institute
Thought leadership from Credit Suisse Research

and the worlds foremost experts
October 2013
Global Wealth
Report 2013
C
O
V
E
R
P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
U
P
T
H
E
B
A
N
N
E
R
,

P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
S
E
A
N
P
A
V
O
N
E
P
H
O
T
O
For more information, please contact:
Richard Kersley, H ead of G lobal
Securities Products and Them es,
Credit Suisse Investm ent Banking,
richard.kersley@ credit-suisse.com
M ichael O Sullivan, Chief Investm ent
O fficer, U K & EEM EA, Credit Suisse
Private Banking & W ealth M anagem ent,
m ichael.osullivan@ credit-suisse.com
03 Introduction
04 Global wealth 2013: The year in review
12 Global trends in household wealth
21 The global wealth pyramid
26 Wealth mobility
38 The outlook for wealth to 2018
45 Wealth of nations
46 U nited States
47 Japan
48 C hina
49 India
50 France
51 U nited Kingdom
52 Sw itzerland
53 Russia
54 Singapore
55 Taiw an
56 Indonesia
57 Australia
58 South Africa
59 C hile
60 B razil
61 C anada
62 Authors
63 Imprint / Disclaimer
Contents
G LO B AL W EALTH REPO RT 2013_2
Introduction
The 2013 C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth Report and the m ore detailed
accom panying G lobal W ealth D atabook aim to provide the m ost
com prehensive study of w orld w ealth. U nlike other studies, they
m easure and analyze trends in w ealth across nations, from the very
bottom of the w ealth pyram idto ultra high net w orth individuals.
This fourth W ealth Report continues our close collaboration w ith
Professors Anthony Shorrocks and Jim D avies, recognized authorities
on this topic, and the principal authors of Personal W ealth from a
G lobal Perspective,O xford U niversity Press, 2008.
G lobal w ealth has reached a new all-tim e high of U SD 241 trillion, up
4.9% since last year and 68% since 2003, w ith the U SA accounting for
72% of the latest increase. Average w ealth per adult reached a new all-
tim e high of U SD 51,600, w ith w ealth per adult in Sw itzerland returning
to above U SD 500,000.
W e expect global w ealth to rise by nearly 40% over the next five
years, reaching U SD 334 trillion by 2018. Em erging m arkets are
responsible for 29% of that grow th. C hina w ill account for nearly 50%
of the increase in em erging econom iesw ealth. W ealth grow th w ill
prim arily be driven by grow th in the m iddle segm ent, but the num ber of
m illionaires w ill also rise m arkedly over the next five years.
Five years on from the global financial crisis, our detailed w ealth data
show s a num ber of interesting trends. Em erging country w ealth grow th
has slow ed, w ith som e notable w inners (M exico) and decliners (B razil
and Russia, both hurt by w eaker currencies). W e also find that the
distribution of w ealth in C hina is very different, and apparently m ore
balanced than that of India, and reflects C hinas role as the vanguard of
the em erging consum er.
In the old w orldw e so far fail to see a positive w ealth effect in
Japan, w hile there has been a resurgence in Eurozone w ealth, w ith our
new estim ates challenging the findings of the recent European C entral
B ank survey, as w e find that the EC B understates the household w ealth
per adult in m ost Eurozone countries, w ith the notable exceptions of
C yprus and M alta.
This year, our special focus is on w ealth m obility, w hich appears
surprisingly high in the short run. For instance, less than tw o-thirds of
the 200001 Forbes billionaires rem ained in the list by 2005, and
barely half by the end of the decade. Across generations, the latest
evidence points to m ore persistence, although continued high w ealth
grow th in countries like C hina w ill ensure that m any individuals rise
rapidly in the w ealth pyram id.
Taking a broader perspective, our analysis suggests that ten
generations or m ore have to lapse before the w ealth of an individual in
N orth Am erica is com pletely independent of the w ealth of their
ancestors. From a global point of view, individuals in C hina and India
have a relatively high probability to be upw ardly m obile as a result of
the high econom ic grow th in these countries.
The C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth Report lays the foundation for a
long-running exam ination by the C redit Suisse Research Institute of one
of the crucial research areas in econom ics, and a vital driver of future
m egatrends. M oreover, it continues the thought leadership and
proprietary research undertaken by the Research Institute over the past
three years.
Hans-Ulrich Meister,
H ead Private B anking & W ealth M anagem ent and
C hief Executive O fficer Region Sw itzerland
Robert S. Shafir,
H ead Private B anking & W ealth M anagem ent and
C hief Executive O fficer Region Am ericas
Average wealth passes USD 50,000 and sets
new all-time high
D espite the continuing challenges posed by the
econom ic environm ent, the underlying factors this
year have been broadly positive for global house-
hold w ealth. For the w orld as a w hole, w e estim ate
that personal w ealth increased by 4.9% during the
year to m id-2013 and now totals U SD 241 trillion
(see table 1). Aggregate total w ealth passed the
pre-crisis peak in 2010, and since then has set
new highs every year. Average w ealth also estab-
lished a new high at U SD 51,600 per adult, the
first tim e that average global w ealth has passed the
U SD 50,000 thres hold since 2007.
A tale of two countries:
the United States and Japan
Looking in m ore detail at the global pattern, the
story this year is a tale of tw o countries. The U nited
States posted a fifth successive year of rises in
personal w ealth. Fuelled by a recovery in house
prices and a bull equity m arket w hich drove the
D ow Jones to new highs, the U nited States added
U SD 8.1 trillion to the global w ealth stock, increas-
ing w ealth ow nership by 12.7% to U SD 72.1 tril-
lion. This is 20% m ore than the pre-crisis high in
2006 and 54% above the recent low in 2008.
Aggressive m onetary policy by the B ank of
Japan (B O J) spurred an even greater rise in equity
prices up 52% in the year to m id-2013. B ut equi-
ties in Japan are very low by international stan-
dards, accounting for less than 10% of household
financial w ealth, and the sam e aggressive B O J
policies drove the yen-U SD exchange rate dow n by
22% . As a consequence, total household w ealth in
Japan has fallen by U SD 5.8 trillion this year,
equivalent to 20% of Japanese net w orth. Japan
suffered very little during the global financial crisis
in fact personal w ealth grew by 21% betw een
2007 and 2008. H ow ever, in m arked contrast to
recent perform ance by the U nited States, total
w ealth is now just 1% above the 2008 level.
In m ost other parts of the w orld, the econom ic
environm ent has been generally favorable to w ealth
acquisition. W hile the Japanese experience led to a
net loss for the Asia-Pacific region (excluding C hina
and India), gains w ere recorded in all other regions
and w ere particularly evident in Europe and C hina,
w hich together added a further U SD 7 trillion.
D espite the gain in Europe, total w ealth in N orth
Am erica overtook European holdings to becom e the
leading region for the first tim e since 2005.
O verall, the rise in net w ealth w as split evenly
betw een financial assets and non-financial assets,
but the pattern varied across regions. The change
in financial assets dom inated in N orth Am erica and
Asia-Pacific. In all other regions especially C hina
and India non-financial assets accounted for
m ost of the increase. H ousehold debt also rose
according to our figures. Although the global rise of
1.7% w as relatively sm all, India and C hina recorded
sizeable increases: 16% and 20% , respectively.

Asset price changes
O ver long periods, trends in household w ealth are
strongly related to econom ic grow th, saving rates,
and other econom ic and dem ographic factors. O ver
Global wealth 2013:
The year in review
Although w ealth is one of the pillars of the econom ic system , reliable data
on personal w ealth ow nership is in short supply. The C redit Suisse G lobal
W ealth Report aim s to help bridge this deficit by providing the m ost
com prehensive, reliable and tim ely source of inform ation on global house-
hold w ealth. G lobal w ealth has reached a new all-tim e high of U SD 241
trillion, up 4.9% since last year, w ith the U S accounting for m ost of the rise.
Average w ealth hit a new peak of U SD 51,600 per adult, but inequality
rem ains high, w ith the top 10% of the w orld population ow ning 86% of global
w ealth, com pared to barely 1% for the bottom half of all adults.
P
H
O
T
O
:

S
H
U
T
T
E
R
S
T
O
C
K
.
C
O
M
/
P
K
O
M
Table 1
Change in household wealth 20122013, by region
Source: Jam es D avies, Rodrigo Lluberas and A nthony Shorrocks, C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth D atabook 2013
Total
wealth
Change in total
wealth
Wealth
per adult
Change
in wealth
per adult
Change in financial
assets
Change in non-
financial assets
Change in debts
2013
USD bn
201213
USD bn
201213
%
2013
USD
201213
%
201213
USD bn
201213
%
201213
USD bn
201213
%
201213
USD bn
201213
%
Africa 2,711 32 1.2 4,929 -1.5 8 0.6 22 1.4 -2 -0.8
Asia-
Pacific
48,075 -4,510 -8.6 43,445 -10.2 -3,344 -10.4 -1,902 -6.4 -737 -7.8
China 22,191 1,402 6.7 22,230 5.5 531 5.2 1,110 9.4 238 20.5
Europe 76,254 5,475 7.7 130,712 7.6 3,048 8.4 3,300 6.9 873 6.5
India 3,613 249 7.4 4,706 5.1 10 1.8 271 8.9 31 15.9
Latin
America
9,139 317 3.6 23,265 1.8 133 3.5 204 3.2 20 1.5
North
America
78,898 8,362 11.9 296,004 10.5 5,376 9.4 3,270 11.6 284 1.9
World 240,881 11,328 4.9 51,634 3.3 5,761 4.1 6,274 4.9 708 1.7
house prices declined by m ore than 5% in Russia,
Spain, the N etherlands and H ungary, and by 11%
in G reece, according to the latest available figures.
US dollar appreciation
In recent years exchange rate m ovem ents versus
the U S dollar have had a significant im pact on the
relative w ealth rankings of individual countries
w ithin the global league table. D uring the year to
June 2013, exchange rate changes w ere confined
to a narrow er range (typically -5% to +5% ) than in
the past, and hence had less im pact. As already
noted, the principal exception w as Japan, w hich
depreciated by 22% . Egypt, Argentina and South
Africa also devalued by m ore than 15% . In con-
trast, currencies appreciated in Poland and N ew
Zealand by about 7% and in Sw eden and M exico
by about 10% . O n the w hole, exchange rate m ove-
m ents had a slightly negative im pact. B etw een
m id-2012 and m id-2013, total global w ealth grew
by 4.9% w hen m easured in current U SD but by
6.6% w hen using constant U SD exchange rates.
Winners and losers among countries
The extent to w hich the U nited States and Japan
dom inate the w orld picture this year is illustrated
by Figure 2, w hich show s the countries w ith the
largest total w ealth gains and losses. C hina
(U SD 1.4 trillion), G erm any (U SD 1.2 trillion) and
shorter tim espans, how ever, changes in household
w ealth across countries tend to be driven by m ove-
m ents in asset prices and exchange rates. Last year
these m ovem ents w ere generally encouraging.
Figure 1 sum m arizes the position for the G 8
countries plus C hina and India. C apital m arkets in
France and G erm any recovered from the declines
experienced a year or tw o ago, each increasing
in value by m ore than 15% . The U nited States
m atched this perform ance and the U nited Kingdom
w as not far behind. Elsew here, stock m arkets w ere
noticeably robust in Argentina, Australia, Indonesia,
the N etherlands, Pakistan, Sw itzerland, Thailand
and the U nited Arab Em irates w here equity prices
rose by m ore than 20% . They w ere even m ore
buoyant in Japan, Luxem bourg and Serbia, w here
the rise exceeded 50% , and G reece did better still,
reversing m uch of the recent m arket decline w ith a
rise of 139% . In contrast, m arket capitalization fell
by 2% 3% in C hina and India and by 12% in
Russia. The other significant losses w ere recorded
in relatively sm all econom ies: Peru (-20% ), C zech
Republic (-22% ) and B angladesh (-39% ).
H ouse prices are another useful predictor of the
non-financial com ponent of household w ealth.
They have been flat or gently rising in m ost coun-
tries this year, typically lying in the -5% to +5%
range. C hina (6% ) and the U nited States (7% ) did
rather better than average, along w ith B razil, South
Africa and India. H ong Kong (17% ) and the U nited
Arab Em irates (20% ) topped the table. Elsew here,
Figure 1
Change in market capitalization, house prices and USD exchange rate (%), 20122013
-30 -25 -20
C anada
C hina
France
G erm any
India
Italy
Japan
Russia
U nited Kingdom
U nited States
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 60 30 35 40 45 50 55
H ouse prices M arket capitalization U SD exchange rate
France (U SD 1.1 trillion) are the only other coun-
tries w here the change in w ealth exceeded U SD 1
trillion. Total w ealth changed in a further eight
counr|os by moro hun USD200 b||||on (u|| gu|ns):
Italy, the U nited Kingdom , Spain, M exico, Sw eden,
India, Korea and C anada.
The equity price increase and the slightly favor-
able euro-dollar m ovem ent enabled the Eurozone
countries to recover m ore than half of the very large
w ealth loss experienced 12 m onths earlier. The
U nited Kingdom , India and Sw itzerland also m anaged
to recover a significant portion of recent losses.
Expressing the w ealth gains and losses in per-
centage term s produces a different league table,
illustrated in Figure 3. Fifteen countries registered
double-digit w ealth gains. W ith a 13% grow th rate,
the U nited States lies in the m iddle of this group
and no longer stands out. H ousehold w ealth rose
at a slightly faster rate in U ruguay, Sw eden, N ew
Zealand, Azerbaijan and M exico. According to our
calculations, Libya surpassed them all by a consid-
erable m argin. H ow ever, w ealth data for Libya are
of very poor quality, so our estim ate of 60% grow th
for the year ending m id-2013 is less reliable than
the figures for other countries.
Even in percentage term s, Japan continues to be
the w orst perform er, although several other coun-
tries especially Argentina and Egypt are little bet-
ter. M uch of the w ealth decline in Argentina, Egypt,
South Africa and B razil is due to currency deprecia-
tion versus the U SD . In contrast, the 5% loss in
Russia reflects the 12% fall in m arket capitalization
com bined w ith a 6% drop in house prices.
Wealth per adult across countries
As already noted, global household w ealth equates
to U SD 51,600 per adult, a new all-tim e high for
average net w orth. This average global value m asks
considerable variation across countries and regions,
as is evident in Figure 3. The richest nations, w ith
w ealth per adult over U SD 100,000, are found in
N orth Am erica, W estern Europe, and am ong the
rich Asia-Pacific and M iddle Eastern countries.
They are headed by Sw itzerland, w hich in 2011
becam e the first country in w hich average w ealth
exceeded U SD 500,000. It dropped below this
m ark in 2012, but this year equity price rises
resulted in a new peak value of U SD 513,000 per
adult. Australia (U SD 403,000), N orw ay (U SD
380,000) and Luxem bourg (U SD 315,000) all
experienced an increase in w ealth per adult and
retain their respective second, third and fourth
places from 2012. The U nited States, Sw eden,
France, Singapore, B elgium and D enm ark are
close behind, w ith average w ealth per adult in the
U SD 250,000 to U SD 300,000 range. A year ago,
Japan m oved up to fourth place in the table, but it
has now been dem oted and no longer ranks am ong
the top ten countries.
Interestingly, the ranking by m edian w ealth per
adult is slightly different, favoring countries w ith
Notes on concepts and methods: N et w orth or w ealthis defined as the value of financial assets
plus real assets (principally housing) ow ned by households, less their debts. This corresponds to the
balance sheet that a household m ight draw up, listing the item s w hich are ow ned and their net value if
sold. Personal pension fund assets are included in principle, but not entitlem ents to state pensions.
H um an capital is excluded altogether, along w ith assets and debts ow ned by the state (w hich cannot
easily be assigned to individuals).
For convenience, w e disregard the relatively sm all am ount of w ealth ow ned by children on their ow n
account, and fram e our results in term s of the global adult population, w hich totaled 4.7 billion in 2013.
The Asia-Pacificregion excludes C hina and India, w hich are treated separately due to the size of
their populations.
D ata for 2012 and 2013 refer to m id-year estim ates; the figures for earlier years indicate year-end values.
Figure 2
Change in total wealth 20122013 (USD bn),
biggest gains and losses
S ource: Jam es D avies, Rodrigo Lluberas and A nthony Shorrocks, C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth D atabook 2013
Figure 3
Percentage change in household wealth 20122013,
biggest gains and losses
-8000 -6000 0 -4000 -2000 2000 4000 6000 8000 10 000
Brazil
Russia
South Africa
Canada
Korea
India
Sw eden
M exico
Spain
U nited Kingdom
Italy
France
G erm any
China
Japan
U nited
States
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Japan
Argentina
Egypt
South Africa
Russia
Brazil
G erm any
N orw ay
G reece
D enm ark
Ireland
Israel
Poland
Bangladesh
U nited States
U ruguay
Sw eden
N ew Zealand
Azerbaijan
M exico
Libya
low er levels of w ealth inequality. Australia (U SD
220,000) tops the list again this year, w ith only
Luxem bourg (U SD 183,000) in close contention.
M edian w ealth in B elgium , France, Italy, the U K,
and Japan lies in the U SD 110,000 to 150,000
range. Sw itzerland, Finland and N orw ay have
slightly low er values of around U SD 95,000, but
the U nited States is m uch further back w ith m edian
w ealth of just U SD 45,000.
The rich country group w ith w ealth per adult
above U SD 100,000 has very stable m em bership
over tim e. G reece dropped out of the group a year
ago, but has now returned. C yprus and Spain have
also seem ed vulnerable to dem otion in recent
years, but no longer appear to be at im m ediate risk,
w ith m ean w ealth per adult of U SD 120,000 and
U SD 124,000 respectively.
Intermediate wealth
The interm ediate w ealthgroup portrayed in Fig-
ure 4 covers countries w ith m ean w ealth in the
U SD 25,000 to U SD 100,000 range. Som e Euro-
pean U nion (EU ) countries (Portugal, M alta and
Slovenia) are situated at the top end of the band,
w hile m ore recent EU entrants (C zech Republic,
Estonia and Slovakia) are found low er dow n. The
interm ediate w ealth group also encom passes a
num ber of M iddle Eastern nations (B ahrain, O m an,
Lebanon and Saudi Arabia) and several Latin
Am erican countries (C hile, C olum bia, C osta Rica,
M exico and U ruguay) considered to be em erging
m arkets. H ungary and Poland returned to the inter-
m ediate w ealth group after a years absence. Libya
and Turkey m oved back into the group after several
years aw ay.
Frontier wealth
The frontier w ealthrange from U SD 5,000 to
25,000 per adult covers the largest area of the
w orld and m ost of the heavily populated countries,
including C hina, Russia, Indonesia, B razil, Philip-
pines, Egypt and Iran. The band also contains m any
transition nations outside the EU (Albania, Arm enia,
Azerbaijan, B osnia, G eorgia, Serbia, Kazakhstan
and M ongolia), m ost of Latin Am erica (Argentina,
Ecuador, El Salvador, Panam a, Paraguay, Peru and
Venezuela), and m any countries bordering the M ed-
iterranean (Algeria, Jordan, Libya, M orocco, Syria
and Tunisia). South Africa recently belonged to the
interm ediate w ealth group, but now falls in this cat-
egory alongside other leading sub-Saharan nations:
B otsw ana, Equatorial G uinea and N am ibia. Laos
and Sri Lanka m oved above U SD 5,000 this year,
to join their neighbor Thailand in this group.
The final group of countries w ith w ealth below
U SD 5,000 is heavily concentrated in central Africa
and south Asia. This group encom passes all of
central Africa apart from Angola, Equatorial G uinea
and G abon. India is the m ost notable m em ber of
the Asia contingent, w hich also includes B angla-
desh, C am bodia, M yanm ar, N epal, Pakistan and
Vietnam . Languishing in the m iddle of this w ealth
range are also three countries bordering the EU :
B elarus, M oldova and U kraine. P
H
O
T
O
:

S
H
U
T
T
E
R
S
T
O
C
K
.
C
O
M
/
J
O
R
G

H
A
C
K
E
M
A
N
N
Figure 4
World wealth levels 2013
below U SD 5,000
W ealth levels (U SD )
U SD 5,000 to 25,000
U SD 25,000 to 100,000
O ver U SD 100,000
N o data
than 1% of total w ealth. In sharp contrast, the rich-
est 10% hold 86% of the w orlds w ealth, and the
top 1% alone account for 46% of global assets.
Regional m em bership in global w ealth deciles
(i.e. population tenths) is show n in Figure 6. The
m ost prom inent feature is the contrast betw een
C hina and India. C hina has very few representa-
tives at the bottom of the global w ealth distribution,
and relatively few at the top, but dom inates the
upper m iddle section, accounting for 40% of the
w orldw ide m em bership of deciles 69. The size-
able presence of C hina in the upper m iddle section
reflects not only its population size and grow ing
average w ealth, but also w ealth inequality w hich,
despite recent increases, rem ains m odest by the
standards of the developing w orld. C hinas position
in the global picture has shifted tow ards the right in
the past decade due to its strong record of grow th,
rising asset values and currency appreciation.
C hina now has m ore people in the top 10% of
global w ealth holders than any other country except
for the U SA and Japan, having m oved into third
place in the rankings by overtaking Italy and G er-
m any. In contrast, residents of India are heavily
concentrated in the low er w ealth strata, accounting
for a quarter of people in the bottom half of the
distribution. H ow ever, its extrem e w ealth inequality
and im m ense population m ean that India also has a
significant num ber of m em bers in the top w ealth
echelons.
As Figure 6 show s, residents of Asia-Pacific
nations (excluding C hina and India) are fairly evenly
spread across the global w ealth spectrum . H ow -
ever, this uniform ity m asks a substantial degree of
polarization. M em bers of high-incom e Asian coun-
tries, such as Japan, Singapore and H ong Kong,
are heavily concentrated at the top end: half of all
adults in high-incom e Asian countries are placed in
the top global w ealth decile. In contrast, residents
of low er-incom e countries in Asia, such as Indone-
sia, B angladesh, Pakistan and Vietnam , tend to be
found low er dow n in the w ealth distribution. In fact,
w hen high-incom e countries are excluded from the
Asia-Pacific group, the w ealth pattern w ithin the
rem aining countries resem bles that of India, w ith
both regional groupings contributing about one
quarter of the bottom half of w ealth holders. Africa
is even m ore concentrated at the bottom end. H alf
of all African adults are found in the bottom tw o
global w ealth deciles. At the sam e tim e, w ealth
inequality w ithin and across countries in Africa is so
high that som e individuals are found am ong the top
10% of global w ealth holders, and even am ong the
top 1% .
Latin Am erica is another region w hose w ealth
distribution closely m im ics the global pattern, w ith
individuals fairly evenly spread across the w ealth
deciles. N orth Am erica and Europe are skew ed
m uch m ore tow ards the high end, together
accounting for 62% of adults in the top 10% , and
an even higher percentage of the top percentile.
Europe alone accounts for 38% of m em bers of the
Wealth of regions
The distinctive regional pattern evident in the w orld
m ap is captured succinctly by com paring the share
of household w ealth of each region w ith its share
of the adult population. N orth Am erica is the region
w ith the highest average w ealth. It is also the
region w ith the highest share of total w ealth
(32.8% ), although Europes bigger population
m eans that its w ealth share (31.7% ) is only frac-
tionally low er (see Figure 5). The 20% share of
w ealth held in Asia-Pacific countries (excluding
C hina and India) is quite sim ilar to the population
share of the region (23.7% ). Elsew here, the dis-
parity betw een population and w ealth becom es
increasingly apparent. D espite m aking enorm ous
strides in recent years, C hinese residents account
for 21.4% of the adult population of the w orld, yet
only 9.2% of global w ealth. In Latin Am erica the
ratio is sim ilar: 8.4% to 3.8% . B ut for Africa and
India, the population share exceeds the w ealth
share by a factor of ten.
Distribution of wealth across individuals
To determ ine how global w ealth is distributed
across households and individuals rather than
regions or countries w e com bine our data on the
level of household w ealth across countries w ith
inform ation on the pattern of w ealth distribution
w ithin countries. O ur estim ates for m id-2013 indi-
cate that once debts have been subtracted, an
adult requires just U SD 4,000 in assets to be in the
w ealthiest half of w orld citizens. H ow ever, a person
needs at least U SD 75,000 to be a m em ber of
the top 10% of global w ealth holders, and U SD
753,000 to belong to the top 1% . Taken together,
the bottom half of the global population ow n less
Figure 5
Wealth and population by region, 2013
5 0 35 10 15 20 25
Europe
N orth Am erica
As|u-Puc|lc
China
Latin Am erica
India
30
Africa
Share of total w ealth in % Share of adult population in %
top w ealth decile, a proportion that rose consider-
ably over the past decade alongside the euro
appreciation against the U S dollar.
World wealth spectrum
W ealth is a key com ponent of the econom ic sys-
tem . It is valued as a source of finance for future
consum ption, especially in retirem ent, and for
reducing vulnerability to shocks such as unem ploy-
m ent, ill health or natural disasters. W ealth also
enhances opportunities for entrepreneurial activi-
ties w hen used either directly or as collateral for
loans. These functions are less im portant in coun-
tries that have generous state pensions, adequate
social safety nets, good public healthcare, high
quality public education and w ell-developed busi-
ness finance. C onversely, the need to acquire per-
sonal assets is particularly com pelling in countries
that have rudim entary social insurance schem es
and restricted options for business finance, as is
the case in m uch of the developing w orld.
The C redit Suisse W ealth Report aim s to provide
a com prehensive portrait of w orld w ealth, covering
all regions and countries, and all parts of the w ealth
spectrum from rich to poor. D espite a decade of
negative real returns on equities, several equity
bear m arkets and the collapse of housing bubbles,
w e find that total global w ealth has m ore than dou-
bled since 2000. Strong econom ic grow th and ris-
ing population levels in em erging nations are im por-
tant drivers of this trend.
The top ten countries in the w ealth-per-adult league
table include m any sm aller, dynam ic econom ies
Sw itzerland, N orw ay, Luxem bourg, Singapore,
Sw eden, B elgium and D enm ark as w ell as
France, Australia and the U SA. N otable cases of
em erging w ealth are found in C hile, C olum bia, the
C zech Republic, Lebanon, Slovenia and U ruguay,
w hile frontierw ealth is evident in Egypt, Indone-
sia, M alaysia, Tunisia and Vietnam .
For a num ber of reasons, w ealth varies greatly
across individuals. O ur estim ates suggest that the
low er half of the global population possesses barely
1% of global w ealth, w hile the richest 10% of
adults ow n 86% of all w ealth, and the top 1%
account for 46% of the total. O ver tim e, this m ay
change, particularly if enough low -w ealth countries
experience rapid grow th, and if C hina and India ful-
fill their potential to be m ajor catalysts of global
m etam orphosis. H ow ever, any trend tow ards
equalization is likely to be slow.
This chapter has outlined som e of the m ain
changes in personal w ealth during the year to m id-
2013 and key results concerned w ith the pattern of
total w ealth ow nership across regions and coun-
tries. The m ore extensive C redit Suisse W ealth
D atabook that accom panies this report describes
the m ethodology used and the results obtained in
greater detail. The follow ing chapters look at the
longer-term w ealth trends and the pattern of w ealth
holdings across individuals. This year w e also
exam ine w ealth m obility the extent to w hich peo-
ple m ove betw een w ealth strata.
Figure 6
Regional composition of global wealth distribution 2013
100 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
70 %
80 %
90 %
30 %
20 %
10 %
0 %
D ecile
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
India
China
Africa
Europe
Latin America
North America
Global trends in
household wealth
This chapter exam ines how household w ealth and its com ponents
have changed over tim e. H ousehold w ealth has m ore than doubled since
2000, but gains w ere concentrated m ore in the first half of the period.
D eleveraging pressures are still evident, w ith debts per adult flat since last
year. W e also provide new estim ates of w ealth per adult in the Eurozone
that challenge the findings of the recent EC B survey.
Regional trends in global wealth
B y our estim ation, global household w ealth in m id-
2013 totaled U SD 241 trillion, equivalent to
USD 5!,600 por udu|. Dosp|o ho sobuck |n
2008, Figure 1 show s that household w ealth has
trended strongly upw ard since the start of the m il-
lennium . The global aggregate has m ore than dou-
bled from the U SD 113 trillion recorded for the
year 2000, and w ealth has m ore than doubled in
each region apart from N orth Am erica and Asia-
Pacific, w here the rises w ere lim ited to 88% and
74% , respectively. D uring the sam e period, per-
sonal w ealth in India rose by 211% and in C hina by
376% . Even allow ing for the rise in the adult popu-
lation, net w orth per adult increased by 68% from
2000, a grow th rate of 4.1% per annum .
Figure 2 captures the variety of regional experi-
ences since 2000. Personal w ealth fell by 14%
w orldw ide in the afterm ath of the financial crisis.
The Asia-Pacific region excluding C hina and India
posted a 1% gain during 200708, but all other
regions suffered a decline in w ealth ranging from
the 14% reduction in Latin Am erica to the 24%
drop recorded for India. In the period since 2008,
w ealth has increased in every region. In m ost cases
the rise has reversed any loss during the crisis, but
total w ealth rem ains below the 2007 peak in
Europe and Africa.
The outstanding w ealth perform ance of C hina
and, to a lesser extent, India since the year 2000
is evident from Figure 2. Another interesting fea-
ture is the tim ing of the grow th spurts. W ealth
grow th in C hina during the first half of the period
w as about three tim es the grow th achieved since
2008. For Asia-Pacific and Latin Am erica the m ul-
tiple is closer to tw o. B ut the m ultiple rises above
five for India, and above ten for Africa and Europe. P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
D
I
S
T
I
N
C
T
I
V
E
I
M
A
G
E
S

N orth Am erica is the outlier. It had the second low -
est w ealth grow th rate during 200007, and the
second highest grow th rate since 2008. As a con-
sequence, the w ealth gains during the tw o sub-
periods are roughly in balance. It is this recent spurt
that has enabled N orth Am erica to overtake Europe
and re-establish itself as the region w ith the high-
est aggregate level of household w ealth.
Recent tim e trends in household w ealth have
been heavily influenced by the prevailing U SD
exchange rates, w hich have often varied by 10% or
m ore from year to year. To rem ove this source of
volatility, Figure 3 show s the separate regional
series based on constant U SD exchange rates.
The graphs are sm oother than those based on pre-
vailing U SD exchange rates and reinforce the view
that the underlying w ealth trends have been, and
continue to be, broadly positive. W ealth losses
above 1% w ere experienced only in 200102 in
N orth Am erica (-3% ) and in the afterm ath of the
financial crisis in all regions except Latin Am erica.
B ut even during 200708, only three regions suf-
fered double-digit losses: C hina (-22% ), N orth
Am erica (-21% ) and Africa (-10% ).
Trends in wealth components
Another im portant and interesting dim ension of per-
sonal w ealth is the split betw een financial assets,
non-financial assets and debts. Figure 4 displays
the trends in each of these com ponents, w hich are
expressed here in term s of the average value per
adult. Echoing the trends in total w ealth, net w orth
per adult trended upw ards from 2000 until the
financial crisis caused it to fall by approxim ately
10% . After 2008, average global w ealth increased
each year and now exceeds the pre-crisis level.
U sing constant U SD exchange rates yields a
sm oother graph and a single significant dow nturn,
after w hich the recovery has continued unabated.
The tim e series for the financial and non-finan-
cial com ponents of w ealth per adult closely follow
the pattern for net w orth, and this year both
returned above the pre-crisis peak in 2007. At the
start of the m illennium , financial assets accounted
for w ell over half of the household portfolio, but the
share decreased until 2008, at w hich point the
global w ealth portfolio w as split equally betw een
financial and non-financial assets (m ostly property).
In the period since 2008, the balance has again
tipped tow ards financial assets, w hich have been
w orth about 10% m ore than non-financial assets
for the past couple of years.
O n the liabilities side of the household balance
sheet, average debt rose by 80% betw een 2000
and 2007, and then leveled out. It now am ounts to
U SD 8,900 per adult, unchanged from a year ago.
Expressed as a proportion of household assets,
average debt has m oved in a narrow range, rising
from 16.6% in 2000 to 20% in 2008 and then
falling every year. The current proportion is 17.3% .
Trends in household debt vary w idely across coun-
Figure 1
Total global wealth 20002013, by region
Figure 2
Wealth growth rates since 2000, by region
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
-50
W orld Europe As|u-Puc|lc C hina Latin
Am erica
N orth
Am erica
India Africa
G row th in %
2000 2013 2000 2007 20072008 2008 2013
0
Figure 3
Total wealth by region using constant USD exchange rates
20002013
250
200
150
100
50
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
U SD trn
Africa India Latin Am erica China Asia-Pacilc Europe N orth Am erica
0
U SD tm , log scale 1000
100
10
Europe
1
As|u-Puc|lc C hina Latin Am erica N orth Am erica W orld
India Africa
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
tries. Since the start of the century, household debt
has grow n at a particularly fast rate in transition
countries, and m ore recently in em erging m arket
econom ies.
The com position of household portfolios varies
w idely and system atically across countries. The m ost
persistent feature is the rise in the relative im por-
tance of both financial assets and liabilities w ith the
level of developm ent. For instance, financial assets
account for 43% of gross assets in Europe and 67%
in N orth Am erica, but just 14% of gross assets in
India. H ousehold debt as a percentage of gross
assets is 16% in both Europe and N orth Am erica, but
only 6% in India and 9% in Africa. There are also
variations in portfolios unrelated to the level of devel-
opm ent. Som e developed countries, such as Italy,
have unusually low liabilities (10% of gross assets),
w hile others have surprisingly high debt, for exam ple
D enm ark (31% of gross assets). In addition, the m ix
of financial assets varies greatly, reflecting national
differences in financial structure. The share of equi-
ties in total financial assets, for exam ple, ranges from
42% in the U SA dow n to just 17% in G erm any and
9% in Japan.
Focus on the Eurozone
The m acroeconom ic problem s facing Eurozone
countries have attracted m uch attention in recent
years. Som e of the repercussions for exam ple,
low grow th rates, volatile equity prices and depre-
ciation of the euro relative to the U SD affect
household w ealth, so the release by the European
C entral B ank (EC B ) of results from the first w ave
of its H ousehold Finance and C onsum er Survey
provides a tim ely and w elcom e source of additional
inform ation on assets and debts in the Eurozone
area. Som e of the findings from the EC B data w ere
unexpected and highly controversial: for exam ple,
the suggestion that average w ealth in G erm any is
significantly low er than that in C yprus and M alta.
H ere w e review w hat our data says about w ealth
trends in the Eurozone, and com pare our w ealth
estim ates w ith those of the EC B .
Figure 5 plots the w ealth per adult for the w hole
Eurozone area since the start of the century and
com pares the graph w ith the w orld and European
average. U sing current U SD exchange rates, Euro-
zone w ealth per adult rose by alm ost 150%
betw een 2000 and 2007, then dropped by about
20% and has rem ained relatively flat since 2008.
The pattern for Europe as a w hole w as sim ilar, but
average global w ealth follow ed a different path,
increasing at a slow er pace during the first half of
the period, then m aking up m ost of the deficit after
the financial crisis.
It turns out that the relative perform ance por-
trayed in Figure 5 is alm ost entirely due to appre-
ciation of the euro versus the U SD during the early
part of the century, and the subsequent deprecia-
tion. U sing constant U SD exchange rates pro-
duces the graph depicted in Figure 6. W ealth per
Figure 4
Global trends in wealth per adult
Figure 5
Eurozone wealth per adult at current USD exchange rates
Figure 6
Eurozone wealth per adult at constant USD exchange rates
U SD per adult 5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
N et w orth at constant exchange rates
0
Financial w ealth
Non-lnunc|u| wou|h
N et w orth
D ebt
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(year 2000 = 100) 300
250
200
150
100
50
0
W orld Eurozone Europe
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(year 2000 = 100) 200
150
100
50
0
W orld Eurozone Europe
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
adult in the Eurozone now m arches in tandem w ith
the rest of Europe for the entire period since
2000, and is also in tandem w ith the rest of the
w orld until 2007. The rest of the w orld suffered
slightly m ore than the Eurozone (and Europe) dur-
ing the financial crisis, but has rebounded w ith
w ealth grow th about tw ice as fast in the years
since 2008.
Variation in average wealth
across the Eurozone
W ealth per adult w as EU R 154,900 in m id-2013
for the Eurozone as a w hole, but there are signifi-
cant differences betw een countries (see Figure 7).
O ur estim ates indicate that average household
w ealth in Austria, G erm any, Ireland and the N ether-
lands is sim ilar to the Eurozone level, but w ealth is
about 20% higher in Italy and B elgium , and about
50% higher in France and Luxem bourg. C ountries
low er dow n the ranking include Spain and C yprus
w ith about 60% of the Eurozone average, G reece
w ith half of the Eurozone average, and Estonia and
Slovakia w ith less than 20% of the Eurozone level.
The country positions rem ain relatively stable over
tim e, although som e variations are evident. For
exam ple, France has m oved up from m id-table
since the year 2000, w hile Ireland has m oved dow n
a little in the last few years.
Figure 7
Wealth per adult in Eurozone countries, 2013
250 000 EU R
200 000
150 000
100 000
50 000
S
l
o
v
a
k
i
a
E
s
t
o
n
i
a
S
l
o
v
e
n
i
a
P
o
r
t
u
g
a
l
G
r
e
e
c
e
S
p
a
i
n
M
a
l
t
a
C
y
p
r
u
s
F
i
n
l
a
n
d

I
r
e
l
a
n
d
N
e
t
h
e
r
l
a
n
d
s
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
E
u
r
o
z
o
n
e
A
u
s
t
r
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
B
e
l
g
i
u
m
F
r
a
n
c
e
L
u
x
e
m
b
o
u
r
g
0
Figure 8
Wealth per adult in Eurozone countries: Credit Suisse vs ECB
EU R 400 000
350 000
300 000
250 000
200 000
150 000
50 000
100 000
S
l
o
v
a
k
i
a
S
l
o
v
e
n
i
a
P
o
r
t
u
g
a
l
G
r
e
e
c
e
S
p
a
i
n
M
a
l
t
a
C
y
p
r
u
s
F
i
n
l
a
n
d
N
e
t
h
e
r
l
a
n
d
s
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
A
u
s
t
r
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
B
e
l
g
i
u
m
F
r
a
n
c
e
L
u
x
e
m
b
o
u
r
g
E
u
r
o
z
o
n
e
Credit Suisse EC B
0
Comparison of Credit Suisse
and ECB wealth estimates
The EC B results from the H ousehold Finance and
C onsum er Survey suggest a m arkedly different
pattern across the 15 Eurozone countries for w hich
data w as collected (Estonia and Ireland w ere not
included in the first survey). M ost of the data w ere
collected in 2010, although figures for Finland,
G reece and the N etherlands refer to 2009, and
those for Spain refer to 2008. The EC B cross-
country com parisons are fram ed in term s of w ealth
per household, w hich com plicates m atters given
that household size varies across the countries. To
facilitate com parability w ith our results, the EC B
figures for w ealth per household have been con-
verted into corresponding figures for w ealth per
adult. This causes a few changes in the rankings in
the average w ealth table, but the differences are
not significant.
Figure 8 show s the tw o sets of estim ates for the
countries and years concerned, w ith the countries
ordered according to the C redit Suisse estim ates of
w ealth per adult reported in the G lobal W ealth
Report. The m ost prom inent features are the EC B
values for C yprus and M alta, w hich are about triple
our estim ates, and the EC B level for Luxem bourg,
w hich is 50% higher. Interestingly, these are the
three Eurozone countries to w hich w e give the
Table 1
Comparison of Credit Suisse and ECB estimates of components of wealth per adult
ECB Credit Suisse Ratio of ECB to Credit Suisse values (%)
Country Year Wealth per
adult (EUR)
Wealth per
adult (EUR)
Wealth per
adult
Financial
assets per
adult
Non-financial
assets per
adult
Debts per
adult
Data quality
Austria 2010 156,844 137,095 114 40 151 41 Satisfactory
Belgium 2010 189,682 193,297 98 53 140 71 Satisfactory
Cyprus 2010 322,455 97,005 332 41 489 85 Fair
Finland 2009 100,781 118,816 85 38 108 82 G ood
France 2010 137690 212,984 65 36 79 56 G ood
Germany 2010 117,372 138,235 85 38 120 71 G ood
Greece 2009 69,283 82,587 84 16 104 34 Satisfactory
Italy 2010 134,255 182,806 73 19 101 34 G ood
Luxembourg 2010 375,156 238,225 157 32 248 75 Poor
Malta 2010 163,847 52,030 315 47 790 37 Poor
Netherlands 2009 100,719 133,072 76 31 172 82 G ood
Portugal 2010 70,844 67,822 104 21 161 38 Satisfactory
Slovakia 2010 35,989 16,413 219 33 245 21 Satisfactory
Slovenia 2010 71,307 51,386 139 16 206 34 Satisfactory
Spain 2008 135,413 93,178 145 33 186 57 G ood
Eurozone 125,242 148,542 84 33 115 59
low est w ealth data quality rating: w ealth data for
Luxem bourg and M alta are classed as poor, and
C yprus is regarded as fair.
O ur estim ate of w ealth per adult exceeds the
EC B value for m ost of the other countries. O ur
value is about 20% higher for Finland, G erm any
and G reece, about 35% higher for Italy and the
N etherlands, and 50% above the EC B level for
France. This leads to som e notable reversals in
the country com parisons. For exam ple, the aver-
age adult in France has m ore than double the
w ealth of that in C yprus according to our esti-
m ates, but less than half the level according to the
EC B . M alta has 50% m ore w ealth per adult than
the N etherlands according to the EC B , but our
calculations suggest that the D utch are m ore than
tw ice as rich.
Components of wealth in Eurozone countries
Looking in m ore detail at the com ponents of w ealth
reveals even m ore glaring discrepancies. For the
Eurozone as a w hole, EC B w ealth averaged 84%
of our estim ated level. The EC B figures capture
115% of our valuation of non-financial assets, but
only 59% of our household debts, and just 33% of
financial assets (see Table 1). Regarding country
level differences, w e estim ate that the EC B has
uncovered only 79% of non-financial assets in
France, but exaggerates non-financial assets in
C yprus by a factor of alm ost five and in M alta by
a factor of alm ost eight. Less than 40% of house-
hold debt is revealed in the EC B results for G reece,
Italy, M alta, Portugal, Slovakia and Slovenia, and
less than 30% of financial w ealth appears in the
EC B figures for G reece, Italy, Portugal and Slove-
nia. W hile som e of these discrepancies m ay have
legitim ate explanations, it seem s im plausible that
non-financial assets in C yprus are w orth three
tim es as m uch as in G erm any or the N etherlands,
or that C yprus has double the financial assets of
Italy. M ore significantly, the EC B figures suggest
that non-financial assets in the Eurozone are w orth
five tim es as m uch as financial assets, and ten
tim es as m uch as net financial assets (w hen debts
are subtracted). This does not square w ith every-
day experience.
Household balance sheets versus survey data
Som e of the discrepancies betw een the EC B
results and our ow n m ay arise from the different
w ay in w hich the figures are calculated. O ur esti-
m ates are based on household balance sheets
(H B S) w hich have been constructed for financial
assets and debts in all Eurozone countries,
although only four Eurozone countries have H B S
data for non-financial assets as w ell. The EC B
w ealth estim ates do not m ake use of these H B S
data, but instead rely w holly on household surveys.
W hile H B S data try to cover all household assets,
household w ealth surveys typically exclude assets
that households are unlikely to report accurately,
including financial item s such as cash, antiques
and collectibles, personal loans (as an asset), and
equity in occupational pension plans. Together,
these com prise over half of all household financial
assets in som e countries. In addition, the assets of
sm all businesses are treated as real assets in the
EC B fram ew ork, w hereas H B S data apportion the
financial assets of sm all businesses to the financial
side of the balance sheet. Finally, non-profit insti-
tutions serving households (like churches, hospi-
tals, universities) are often included w ith the
household sector and typically inflate asset values
by 5 % 10% . All of these reasons lead us to
expect that our estim ates of financial assets w ill be
higher than the EC B results, and that expectation
is borne out in practice.
Sources of errors in wealth survey data
Apart from differences in the coverage of assets
and debts, the only other source of differences
betw een the C redit Suisse and EC B valuations of
financial assets and debts is errors in the data. W e
believe that the H B S data are less prone to error
because they are assem bled using the best evi-
dence from a range of sources. H ousehold w ealth
surveys, on the other hand, are subject to tw o kinds
o non-sump||ng orror: d|oron|u| rosponso ruos
the fact that w ealthier people are less likely to
respond and reporting error, w hich m ost usually
com prises under-reporting of financial assets and
debts. D ifferential response is thought to cause
underestim ation of 20% 30% or m ore, w hile
under-reporting of som e financial assets, for exam -
ple bank accounts, can range up to 50% .
D ifferential response has less of an im pact on
non-financial assets because the largest com po-
nent is ow ner-occupied housing, and housing is
less concentrated in the hands of the w ealthier
individuals (w ho m ay fail to respond to the survey)
than stocks and bonds. Reporting error m ay be
even less problem atic because, com pared to finan-
cial assets, hom eow ners tend to report the value of
their houses w ith m uch greater accuracy w ithin
2% 6% of the true value according to a num ber of
studies. As regards debts, hom eow ners m ay be
happy to report an outstanding m ortgage, but less
com fortable revealing short-term loans and credit
card balances. So the 50% shortfall indicated in
Table 1 is in line w ith w hat m ight be expected from
under-reporting of debts.
Conclusions
W hile the G lobal W ealth Report aim s to provide the
best inform ation on household w ealth, w e recog-
nize that reliable estim ates of household w ealth
rem ain a challenge. The EC B data is a w elcom e
new source of evidence w hich w e have used this
year to im prove our estim ates of w ealth distribution
in Eurozone countries, and m ay use in future to
im prove our techniques for estim ating w ealth lev-
els. O n balance, how ever, the EC B results do not
|oud us o rud|cu||y chungo our |owo wou|h |n ho
Eurozone. W e have confidence in the H B S data
w hich underpin our figures for financial assets and
debts throughout the Eurozone, and w hich also
report non-financial assets in the core countries
of France, G erm any, Italy and the N ether-
|unds.Wobo||oo hu ho d|oroncos bowoon ho
C redit Suisse and EC B figures revealed in Figure 8
und Tub|o ! uro |urgo|y duo o our w|dorcoorugo
of financial assets and teething problem sin the
smu||or counr|os whorowou|h suroysworo con-
ducod or ho |rs |mo. Suroy prob|oms o d|-
oron|u| rosponso und ropor|ng orror cun bo
addressed through careful research and im proved
suroy sruog|os. l |s o bo hopod hu oor |mo
the EC B survey results for the sm aller countries w ill
bocomo moro ro||ub|o hrough such oors.
O ur estim ates for the years 2008 to 2013 sug-
gest that w ealth per adult changed very little in the
Eurozone countries during that period. Austria m ay
have edged up a little, and the N etherlands shaded
dow n a touch, but w e see no significant change in
the relative country rankings. W hen the EC B con-
ducts the next round of w ealth surveys, w e hope
that our predictions for w ealth per adult in Eurozone
countries can be used as a benchm ark for com -
parison w ith the survey results. P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
D
E
E
J
P
I
L
O
T
The global
wealth
pyramid
This chapter looks at the pattern of w ealth
ow nership across individuals, exam ining not
only the top echelons of w ealth holders, but
also the often neglected m iddle and bottom
sections of the w ealth pyram id. Tw o-thirds of
adults in the w orld have w ealth below U SD
10,000 and together account for m erely 3%
of global w ealth, w hile the 32 m illion dollar
m illionaires ow n 41% of all assets.
P
H
O
T
O
:

S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
D
A
D
O
T
H
E
D
U
D
E

Wealth disparity
Personal w ealth varies across adults for m any rea-
sons. Som e individuals w ith little w ealth m ay be at
early stages in their careers, w ith little chance or
m otivation to accum ulate assets. O thers m ay have
suffered business setbacks or personal m isfor-
tunes, or live in parts of the w orld w here opportuni-
ties for w ealth creation are severely lim ited. At the
other end of the spectrum , there are individuals
w ho have acquired a large fortune through a com -
bination of talent, hard w ork or sim ply being in the
right place at the right tim e.
The w ealth pyram id in Figure 1 captures these
differences in striking detail. It has a large base of
low w ealth holders, alongside upper tiers occupied
by progressively few er people. In 2013 w e esti-
m ate that 3.2 billion individuals m ore than tw o-
thirds of adults in the w orld have w ealth below
USD !0,000. A urhor ono b||||on (23 o ho
adult population) fall w ithin the U SD 10,000
100,000 range. W hile the average w ealth holding
is m odest in the base and m iddle segm ents of the
pyram id, their total w ealth am ounts to U SD 40 tril-
lion, underlining the potential for novel consum er
products and innovative financial services targeted
at this often neglected segm ent.
The rem aining 393 m illion adults (8% of the w orld)
each have net w orth in excess of U SD 100,000.
They include 32 m illion U S dollar m illionaires, a
group that com prises less than 1% of the w orlds
adult population, yet collectively holds 41% of
global household w ealth. W ithin this group w e esti-
m ate that 98,700 individuals are w orth m ore than
U SD 50 m illion, and 33,900 are w orth over U SD
100 m illion.
The base of the pyramid
The different strata of the w ealth pyram id have dis-
tinctive characteristics. Although those in the base
level are spread w idely across all regions, repre-
sentation in India and Africa is disproportionately
high, w hile Europe and N orth Am erica are corre-
spondingly underrepresented (see Figure 2). The
base tier has the m ost even distribution across
regions and countries, but it is also the m ost het-
erogeneous, spanning a w ide range of fam ily cir-
cum stances. In developed countries, only about
30% of the population fall into this category, and
for m ost of these individuals, m em bership is a tran-
sient or lifecycle phenom enon associated w ith
youth, old age, or periods of unem ploym ent. In
contrast, m ore than 90% of the adult population in
India and Africa are located w ithin this band. In
som e low -incom e African countries, the percent-
age of the population in this w ealth range is close
to 100% . For m any residents of low -incom e coun-
tries, life m em bership of the base tier is the norm
rather than the exception.
Middle class wealth
The one billion adults located in the U SD 10,000
100,000 range are the m iddle class in the context
of global w ealth. The average w ealth holding is
close to the global average for all w ealth levels, and
total net w orth of U SD 33 trillion provides this seg-
m ent w ith considerable econom ic clout. This is the
tier w hose regional com position m ost closely
m atches the regional distribution of adults in the
w orld, although India and Africa are underrepre-
sented and C hina is over-represented. The contrast
betw een C hina and India is particularly interesting.
India hosts just 4% of the global m iddle class, and
the share has been rising quite slow ly in recent
years. C hinas share, on the other hand, has been
grow ing fast and now accounts for m ore than one-
third of global m em bership, alm ost ten tim es higher
than Indias.
High wealth segment of the pyramid
The regional com position changes significantly
w hen it com es to the 393 m illion adults w orldw ide
w ho m ake up the high segm ent of the w ealth pyra-
m id those w ith net w orth over U SD 100,000.
N orth Am erica, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region
(om itting C hina and India) together account for
89% of the global m em bership of this group, w ith
Europe alone hom e to 153 m illion m em bers (39%
of the total). This com pares w ith 2.8 m illion adult
m em bers in India (0.7% of the global total) and a
sim ilar num ber in Africa.
U SD 98.7 trn (41.0% )
32 m
(0.7% )
361 m
(7.7% )
1,066 m
(22.9% )
3,207 m
(68.7% )
Number of adults (percent of world population)
Wealth
Total wealth
(percent of world)
U SD 101.8 trn (42.3% )
U SD 33.0 trn (13.7% )
U SD 7.3 trn (3.0% )
> U SD 1 m
U SD 100 ,000 to 1 m
U SD 10,000 to 100,000
< U SD 10,000
Figure 1
The global wealth pyramid
Source: Jam es D avies, Rodrigo Lluberas and
A nthony Shorrocks, C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth
D atabook 2013
The pattern of m em bership changes once again
w hen attention shifts to dollar m illionaires at the top
of the pyram id. The num ber of m illionaires in any
given country is determ ined by three factors: the
adult population size, average w ealth and w ealth
inequality. The U nited States scores high on all
three criteria and has by far the greatest num ber of
m illionaires: 13.2 m illion, or 42% of the w orldw ide
total (see Figure 3). A few years ago the num ber of
Japanese m illionaires w as not far short of the
U nited States figure. B ut the num ber of U S m il-
lionaires has crept up just as the num ber of Japa-
nese m illionaires has fallen especially this year.
As a consequence, the share of global m illionaires
from Japan has dipped below 10% for the first tim e
in 30 years or m ore.
The eleven rem aining countries w ith m ore than
1% of the global total are topped by the European
G 7 countries, France, G erm any, the U nited King-
dom and Italy, all of w hich have shares in the
5 7% range. C hina is close behind w ith a 4%
m em bership share and seem s likely to overtake
the leading European countries w ithin a decade.
Sw eden and Sw itzerland have relatively sm all pop-
ulations, but their high average w ealth elevates
them to the list of countries w hich have at least
300,000 m illionaires, the required num ber for 1%
of the w orld total.
Changing membership
of the millionaire group
C hanges to w ealth levels since m id-2012 have
affected the pattern of w ealth distribution. The rise
in average w ealth com bined w ith a population
increase has raised the num ber of adults w ith at
least U SD 10,000 by about 10% . The num ber of
m illionaires w orldw ide has risen by 1.8 m illion, of
w hich the U nited States alone accounts for 1.7 m il-
lion new m em bers (see Table 1). It m ay seem
strange that the Eurozone acquired so m any new
m illionaires last year, m ost notably in France
(287,000), G erm any (221,000), Italy (127,000),
Spain (47,000) and B elgium (38,000); but this
sim ply com pensates in part for the big drop in m il-
lionaire num bers experienced a year ago. Australia,
C anada and Sw eden also ceded m illionaires in
20112012 and now appear am ong the top ten
gainers. Japan com pletely dom inates the list of
countries that shed m illionaires, accounting for
1.2 m illion losses, or 98% of the global total.
High net worth individuals
To estim ate the pattern of w ealth holdings above
U SD 1 m illion requires a high degree of ingenuity
because at high w ealth levels the usual sources of
w ealth data official household surveys becom e
increasingly unreliable. W e overcom e this defi-
ciency by exploiting w ell-know n statistical regulari-
ties to ensure that the top w ealth tail is consistent
w ith the annual Forbes tally of global billionaires
Figure 3
Dollar millionaires by country of residence
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of w ealth group in region
> U SD 1 m illion
U SD 100,000
to 1 m illion
U SD 10,000
to 100,000
< U SD 10,000
All levels
India Africa C hina Europe N orth Am erica As|u-Puc|lc Latin Am erica
U SA 42%
Rest of w orld 12%
Taiw an 1%
Spain 1%
Sw eden 2%
Sw itzerland 2%
Canada 3%
Australia 4%
China 4%
Italy 5%
U K
5%
G erm any
5%
France 7%
Japan 8%
Figure 2
Regional membership of global wealth strata
and sim ilar rich list data published elsew here. This
produces plausible estim ates of the global pattern
of asset holdings in the high net w orth (H N W ) cat-
egory from U SD 1 m illion to U SD 50 m illion, and in
the ultra high net w orth (U H N W ) range from U SD
50 m illion upw ards.
W hile the base of the w ealth pyram id is occu-
pied by people from all countries at various stages
of their lifecycles, H N W and U H N W individuals are
heavily concentrated in particular regions and coun-
tries, and tend to share fairly sim ilar lifestyles, par-
ticipating in the sam e global m arkets for luxury
goods, even w hen they reside in different conti-
nents. The w ealth portfolios of individuals are also
likely to be sim ilar, dom inated by financial assets
and, in particular, equity holdings in public com pa-
nies traded in international m arkets. For these rea-
sons, using official exchange rates to value assets
is m ore appropriate than using local price levels.
W e estim ate that there are now 31.4 m illion
H N W adults w ith w ealth betw een U SD 1 m illion
and U SD 50 m illion, m ost of w hom (28.1 m illion)
lie in the U SD 15 m illion range (see Figure 4).
This year, for the first tim e, m ore than tw o m illion
adults are w orth betw een U SD 5 m illion and 10
m illion, and m ore than one m illion have assets in
the U SD 10-50 m illion range. Tw o years ago
Europe briefly becam e the region w ith the greatest
num ber of H N W individuals, but N orth Am erica
regained the lead and now accounts for a m uch
greater num ber: 14.2 m illion (45% of the total)
com pared to 10.1 m illion (32% ) in Europe. Asia-
Pacific countries excluding C hina and India have
5.2 m illion m em bers (17% ), and w e estim ate that
there are now m ore than one m illion H N W individu-
als in C hina (3.6% of the global total). The rem ain-
ing 804,000 H N W individuals (2.5% of the total)
reside in India, Africa or Latin Am erica.
Table 1
Change in the number of millionaires by country, 20122013
Ultra high net worth individuals
W orldw ide w e estim ate that there are 98,700
U H N W individuals, defined as those w hose net
w orth exceeds U SD 50 m illion. O f these, 33,900
are w orth at least U SD 100 m illion and 3,100 have
assets above U SD 500 m illion. N orth Am erica
dom inates the regional rankings, w ith 48,000
U H N W residents (49% ), w hile Europe has 24,800
individuals (25% ), and 14,200 (14% ) reside in
Asia-Pacific countries, excluding C hina and India.
Am ong individual countries, the U SA leads by a
huge m argin w ith 45,650 U H N W individuals,
equivalent to 45% of the group (see Figure 5) and
alm ost eight tim es the num ber in C hina, w hich is in
second place w ith 5,830 representatives (5.9% of
the global total). This year Sw itzerland (3,460)
m oved up to fourth place leapfrogging Japan
(2,890) and the U nited Kingdom (3,190), but still
behind G erm any (4,500). The num ber of U H N W
individuals in Japan actually fell this year. The num -
bers in C anada, H ong Kong and Russia w ent up,
but not as fast as in other countries, so they
dropped a place or tw o in the rankings. A strong
show ing of U H N W individuals is also evident in
Turkey (1,210), w hich m oved up a couple of places,
and in India (1,760), B razil (1,700), Taiw an (1,370)
and Korea (1,210), all of w hich retained their posi-
tions in last years country rankings.
Conclusion
D ifferences in personal asset holdings can be cap-
tured by a w ealth pyram id, in w hich m illionaires are
located in the top strata and the base tiers are
populated w ith poorer people. C om m entaries on
w ealth often focus exclusively on the top part of
the pyram id, w hich is unfortunate because U SD 40
Main gains Main losses
Country Adults (thousand) with wealth
above USD 1m
Country Adults (thousand) with wealth
above USD 1m
2011 2012 change 2012 2013 change
USA 11,534 13,216 1,682 Japan 3,964 2,655 -1,309
France 1,924 2,211 287 Brazil 233 221 -12
Germany 1,514 1,735 221 Argentina 32 27 -5
Italy 1,323 1,449 127 South Africa 47 43 -5
UK 1,412 1,529 117 Russia 88 84 -4
Sweden 406 506 100 Egypt 25 22 -3
China 1,033 1,123 90
Spain 355 402 47
Canada 948 993 46
Belgium 231 269 38
World 29,867 31,680 1,814 World 29,867 31,680 1,814
trillion of household w ealth is held in the base and
m iddle segm ents, and satisfying the needs of these
asset ow ners m ay w ell drive new trends in con-
sum ption, industry and finance. B razil, C hina,
Korea and Taiw an are countries that are already ris-
ing quickly through this part of the w ealth pyram id,
w ith Indonesia close behind and India grow ing fast
from a low starting point.
At the sam e tim e, the top-of-the-pyram id seg-
m ent w ill likely continue to be the strongest driver of
private asset flow s and investm ent trends. O ur
figures for m id-2013 indicate that there are now
over 30 m illion H N W individuals, w ith m ore than
one m illion located in C hina and 5.2 m illion residing
in Asia-Pacific countries other than C hina and India.
Changing fortunes

At the apex of the pyram id, 98,700 U H N W indi-
viduals are now w orth m ore than U SD 50 m illion.
The recent fortunes created in C hina lead us
to estim ate that 5,830 C hinese adults (5.9% of
the global total) now belong to the U H N W group,
and a sim ilar num ber are residents of B razil, India
or Russia.
W hile there is little reliable inform ation on trends
over tim e in the w ealth pyram id data, it seem s
alm ost certain that w ealth has been grow ing faster
in the top strata of the w ealth pyram id since at
least the year 2000, and that this trend is continu-
ing. For instance, total global w ealth grew by 4.9%
from m id-2012 to m id-2013, but the num ber of
m illionaires in the w orld grew by 6.1% during the
sam e period, and the num ber of U H N W individuals
rose by m ore than 10% . It therefore appears that
the w orld econom y rem ains conducive to the
acquisition and preservation of large and m edium -
sized fortunes.
98,663
1,087,641
2,180,589
28,133,406
Wealth
range
Number
of adults
> U SD 50 m
U SD 10 to 50 m
U SD 5 to 10 m
U SD 1 to 5 m
Figure 4
The apex of the pyramid
Figure 5
Ultra high net worth individuals 2013: selected countries
0 5000 10 000 15000 20 000 25 000 30 000 35 000 50 000 40 000 45 000
India
U SD 50 m 100 m
U SD 100 m 500 m
U SD 500 m 1 bn
> U SD 1 bn
Sw eden
H ong Kong
Korea
Turkey
Spain
Taiw an
B razil
Russia
Australia
Canada
Italy
France
Japan
U nited Kingdom
Switzerland
G erm any
China
U nited States
Wealth
mobility
The w ealth pyram id provides a snapshot of
w ealth ow nership am ong adults. The overall
features change slow ly over tim e, but the
strata are fluid, and individuals seldom
rem ain in the sam e place over the w hole of
their lives. This chapter discusses w ealth
m obility, supplem enting w hat is know n
about changes in individual w ealth positions
w ith new m aterial based on our global
w ealth estim ates.
Introduction
The w ealth pyram id depicts in stark fashion the dif-
ferences in personal asset holdings present in
todays w orld. At the apex of the pyram id, the top
tw o per cent of adults account for half of all global
w ealth, w hile the bottom half of the pyram id col-
lectively ow ns less than one per cent of net w orth.
The exact w ealth pyram id num bers vary from year
to year depending on prevailing econom ic condi-
tions, particularly equity price m ovem ents. B ut
changes in the shares of w ealth over tim e tend to
be very m odest, both w ithin countries and w orld-
w ide. Thus the distribution of w ealth is both highly
unequal and relatively stable over tim e.
W hile the w ealth pyram id provides a snapshot of
w ealth ow nership at a given point of tim e, this is
not the com plete picture. W ithin the overall struc-
ture, individuals and generations of the sam e
fam ily m ove regularly betw een the various strata.
The extent to w hich the disparity evident in the
w ealth pyram id is tolerated perhaps even encour-
aged depends crucially on these dynam ic consid-
erations: the ability of individuals to accum ulate
w ealth, and the degree to w hich the opportunities
to acquire fortunes are open to all. W hen opportu-
nities are m ore equal, w ealth holdings should
change w ith greater frequency and m agnitude; in
other w ords m ore w ealth m obility should be
observed.
M obility has been w idely studied in econom ics in the
context of transitions in and out of unem ploym ent,
and in and out of poverty. Earnings and incom e
m obility have also been given attention. In other
social science disciplines, social and occupational
m obility have been core topics for m any years, and
very often refer to intergenerational transitions,
rather than m ovem ents w ithin generations. The
study of w ealth m obility poses special difficulties,
because the asset holdings of specific individuals, or
groups of individuals, need to be tracked through
tim e. As a consequence, there is very little direct
evidence via sam ple surveys, although other uncon-
ventional sources of inform ation can help fill in the
gaps. In addition to review ing survey evidence, w e
discuss recent findings based on the analysis of rare
surnam es across m any generations, and sum m arize
results derived from m odeling changes in global
w ealth distribution. B ut first w e take a look at a P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
K
I
N
G
_
L
O
U
I
E

readily available source on changes in the w ealth
holdings of specific individuals, nam ely those w ho
appear on the Forbes list of w orld billionaires.
Mobility of billionaires
Tracking changes in the asset holdings of ultra-
high net w orth individuals over tim e has becom e
easier due to the regular publication of rich lists for
a grow ing num ber of countries. Several studies
have exam ined m ovem ents into and out of the
Forbes 400 list of the 400 w ealthiest Am ericans,
and analyses could also be undertaken for the U K
using the Sunday Tim es Rich List, and for C hina,
India, and several other countries w ith sim ilar data.
G iven our global perspective, w e w ill focus on
w ealth m obility am ong those w ho appear on the
Forbes list of the w orlds billionaires during the
period 2000 to 2010.
To im prove accuracy, the Forbes lists for 2000 and
2001 have been m erged into 613 nam es for
200001, w hich are com pared against the 693
nam es listed in 2005 and the 1,011 nam es
recorded in 2010. Table 1 show s the num ber of
billionaires in the G 7 and B RIC countries, the per-
centage of the 2000-01 billionaires still on the list
in 2005 and in 2010, and the percentage of the
2005 billionaires rem aining in 2010. The increase
in num ber of billionaires is particularly evident in
B RIC countries, w here the num ber of billionaires
nearly doubled betw een 200001 and 2005, and
nearly quadrupled betw een 2005 and 2010, raising
the fraction of billionaires in B RIC countries from
5% of the w orld total in 200001 to 19% in 2010.
Particularly striking is the rise from 2 to 64 billion-
aires in C hina from 2005 to 2010. Also notable is
the decline in the num ber of billionaires over the
decade in France, Italy and, m ost especially, Japan.
stayers, w ith 78% of the 200001 billionaires sur-
viving to 2005 and 65% rem aining in 2010. This
m ay reflect the fact that U S billionaires have higher
m ean w ealth than billionaires elsew here, so that
they have to fall further on average to exit the list.
In addition, they face little or no exchange rate risk;
in other countries, for those close to the billionaire
threshold, entry and exit from the billionaire list is
som etim es due sim ply to fluctuations in the U SD
exchange rate.
Am ong the B RIC countries, C hina had only one
billionaire in 200001, no longer present in 2005,
and tw o billionaires in 2005, both of w hom had left
by 2010. The notable feature for C hina is the sharp
increase in the num ber of billionaires after 2005,
reflecting the rapidly lengthening upper tail of the
C hinese w ealth distribution, resulting in high
upw ard structural m obility. The B RIC country in
w hich billionaires have the highest chance of sur-
viving is Russia, w here six of the original eight bil-
lionaires from 200001 w ere still on the list in
2005 and five w ere still present in 2010. O f the 26
Russian billionaires in 2005, 25 of them w ere still
on the list in 2010 a higher survival rate than any
other B RIC or G 7 country. The num ber of Russian
billionaires m ore than doubled betw een 2005 and
2010, so the high survival rate likely reflects low
dow nw ard structural m obility in the upper w ealth
tail, as w ell as higher than average w ealth am ong
w orld billionaires and possibly state protection
of billionaire interests.
The low er-than-expected level of billionaire
retention rates, and the variations observed across
countries, call for a m ore detailed explanation. The
structural im pact of expanding billionaire num bers
Country Number of billionaires
Percentage of 2000-01
billionaires still on list in:
Percentage of 2005
billionaires still on list in:
2000-01 2005 2010 2005 2010 2010
C anada 18 17 24 56 44 88
France 19 14 12 63 47 79
G erm any 47 57 51 60 40 74
Italy 17 10 13 47 41 70
Japan 43 24 22 51 33 58
U nited Kingdom 18 24 29 56 39 79
U nited States 269 342 405 78 65 77
G7 Total 431 488 556 70 55 76
B razil 10 9 18 40 30 89
C hina 1 2 64 0 0 0
India 9 13 50 44 56 85
Russia 8 26 63 75 63 96
BRIC Total 28 50 195 50 46 88
World 613 693 1011 66 52 76
Table 1
Mobility of Forbes World Billionaires, 20002001 to 2010
Source: Authorscalculations using Forbes w orld billionaire lists.
Studies of m obility often m ake a distinction
betw een structural and exchange m obility. Pure
exchange m obility refers to changing positions
w ithin an unchanging overall distribution. In con-
trast, structural m obility relates to the m ovem ents
induced by a change in the overall distributional
pattern. G iven the expansion in the num ber of bil-
lionaires, especially betw een 2005 and 2010,
structural considerations lead us to expect a low
degree of dow nw ard m obility it should have been
relatively easy for billionaires to rem ain in the elite
group. H ow ever, w ealth m obility w as surprisingly
high. Less than tw o-thirds of the 200001 Forbes
billionaires survived until 2005, and barely half
(52% ) survived the decade. The higher five-year
survival rate(76% ) for the 2005 billionaires com -
pared w ith the 66% rate for the 200001 group
suggests less m obility at the extrem e upper-end of
the w orld w ealth distribution, possibly confirm ing
the reduced dow nw ard m obility linked to the expan-
sion in overall billionaire num bers.
Comparisons between countries
Table 1 indicates that the chance of a billionaire
rem aining a billionaire is broadly sim ilar across
countries, although there are som e notable outliers
and som e interesting w ealth m obility differences
betw een countries. Am ong the G 7 countries,
France, Italy and Japan m ight be expected to have
a low er percentage of stayers because their billion-
aire ranks shrank considerably over the decade.
H ow ever, C anada, G erm any and the U K also have
fairly low retention rates. Am ong G 7 countries, the
U nited States has by far the highest fraction of
has already been noted, along w ith fluctuations in
exchange rates. The overall econom ic environm ent
can also be expected to contribute to w ealth m obil-
ity, especially episodes of m arket turbulence and
severe recession, such as the one experienced in
20052010. The final obvious factor is m ortality.
B illionaires tend to be older than the average adult,
and perhaps 10% 20% are likely to die in any
5-year period. Their exit from the Forbes list of bil-
lionaires counts as m obility here even w hen one or
m ore billionaire heirs spring onto the list to replace
the decedent. This could affect w ealth m obility
com parisons betw een countries for exam ple,
betw een C hina, w here the w ealthy are relatively
young, and Japan, w here billionaires are older on
average.
Billionaire spells
D raw ing conclusions about m obility using the
Forbes list of w orld billionaires is com plicated by
the fact that the num ber of people on the list
changes each year, som etim es by a large am ount.
This problem m ay be circum vented by lim iting
attention to the top 100 billionaires in each year.
Figure 1 sum m arizes the survival records for this
sm aller group, and provides a m ore continuous his-
tory of billionaire spells by reporting annual data for
the period 2001 to 2013.
Starting w ith the top 100 billionaires in a given
year from 2001 to 2012, Figure 1 traces the num -
ber rem aining in the top group in each year up to
2013. O n average, 17 of the top 100 billionaires
exit the group w ithin one year. If this exit rate w as
constant and no one returned to the top 100, then
Figure 1
Number of Forbes billionaires remaining in the top 100 over time, 20012013
Source: Authorscalculations using Forbes w orld billionaire lists.
only ten of the top 100 billionaires in year 2001
w ould still be present in 2013. In fact 37 of the
2001 cohort rem ained on the list in 2013. There
are tw o reasons for this. First, m any of those w ho
exit the top 100 list return in later years. These
people are typically on the m argins of the top 100,
and m ay enter and exit the group depending on
their fortunes that year and the prevailing U SD
exchange rate. Secondly, those w ho have been
m em bers of the top 100 for som e tim e are less
likely to exit the group in future, if only because
their w ealth is probably som e w ay above the m em -
bership threshold. The term duration dependence
is used to refer to sim ilar considerations in the con-
text of spells of unem ploym ent or poverty.
The survival curvesdepicted in Figure 1 show
that m obility increases w ith the length of the tim e
period as expected but the increase tails off,
and about one-third appear to rem ain in the top
100 indefinitely. The m obility pattern for succeed-
ing cohorts is fairly sim ilar, and there is little evi-
dence of a trend tow ard greater or lesser m obility
over tim e. H ow ever, the curve for the 2002 cohort
is steeper than that for the 2001 cohort, suggest-
ing slightly greater m obility. There is also a hint that
the curves flatten out earlier for the cohorts from
2006 to 2009, indicating less m obility during this
period. For each of the cohorts from 2011 and
2012, 88 nam es rem ained in the top 100 list after
one year, the highest survival rate seen in the chart,
and w ell above the average figure of 83. W hile it is
unw ise to draw firm conclusions from a sm all sam -
ple, it appears that the last couple of years have
been a period of com parative stability in the land of
the top billionaires.
F
u
r
b
d
o
l
n
|
|
o
n
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Base year
100
cohort, such as education, m igration, occupational
choice, saving rates, inheritance and investm ent
choices. Som e of these variables reflect individual
choice, others fam ily background or the institutional
environm ent. Finally, as a cohort ages its average
w ealth first tends to rise com pared w ith the coun-
trys overall average and then decline during retire-
m ent. This age-related m ovem ent induces a form of
exchange m obility it happens even w hen the over-
all distribution of w ealth is stable.
Another useful perspective considers w ealth
m obility in relation to the three possible sources of
w ealth change: savings; gifts and bequests; and
capital gains. The accum ulation of saving gener-
ates life-cycle or self-accum ulated w ealth, w ith dif-
ferences across fam ilies resulting from differences
in labor incom e and saving rates. C hanges in this
source of w ealth tend to be gradual and to gener-
ate m oderate levels of inequality. In contrast, inher-
itance or capital gains can cause large and abrupt
changes in w ealth for the recipients. Thus they
tend to be an im portant cause of w ealth m obility in
the short run. H ow ever, gifts and bequests can also
have the opposite effect, as they m ay be used by
parents to offset the low er earnings of their less
fortunate offspring, preventing som e dow nw ard
w ealth m obility.
Intragenerational wealth mobility in the USA
Evidence on m obility is often sum m arized in a tran-
sition m atrix indicating the percentage of those in a
given initial state x w ho are later found in end state
y. Table 2 reports a w ealth transition m atrix for fam -
ilies of m en aged 4559 and w om en aged 3044
in 1966 and 1967, and is derived from net w orth in
the m id-1960scom pared to values ten years later
(the m id-1970s). W ealth quintiles (low est 20% ,
next 20% etc.) are used for the initial and end
The impact of the global financial crisis
The m ost interesting and striking feature of Figure
1 is the apparent departure from the norm al pat-
tern in the afterm ath of the global financial crisis.
The first-year survival rate dropped suddenly for
the 2008 cohort of top 100 billionaires. O nly 74
rem ained on the list in 2009. The sm allest num ber
of survivors for any other base year is 80, and the
average figure across all years is 83. Interestingly,
16 of the 26 leavers w ere not am ong the top 100
in 2007. So 16 billionaires appeared in the top
100 in 2008 and then prom ptly dropped out in
2009. This reflects the enhanced volatility of the
financial m arkets during this period.
The abrupt departure of so m any from the list of
top 100 billionaires in 2009 w as m atched, of
course, by an equal and offsetting entry of others.
Som e of the entrants had never been on the list
before, but others returned after an absence.
Those returns account for the rise in the survival
rate in 2009 for the cohorts of 2001 to 2004. A
sim ilar return phenom enon occurs in 2010 for the
2008 cohort itself, reflecting the restoration of
som e of the m arket losses experienced by the top
billionaires in 2009.
Sources of wealth mobility
There are m any reasons w hy individual w ealth levels
vary over tim e. As a birth cohort ages, its m em bers
rise and fall in w ealth relative to each other, and
relative to m em bers of other cohorts. Som e of this
m obility could be due to structural factors, for exam -
ple m em bers of one generation doing com paratively
w orse than the baby boom ers at any given age. B ut
m uch is exchange m obility. W hile the latter can
reflect random effects or luck, it can also be caused
by other factors that change relative w ealth w ithin a P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
G
R
A
F
F
I
C
X

states, so the row s and colum ns refer to the sam e
num ber of observations, and each of the row s and
colum ns sum to 100% .
From one view point, w ealth m obility appears to
be sizeable: averaging the diagonal elem ents
show s that 51% of the sam ple transit to a different
quintile w ithin a ten-year period. O n the other hand,
few people transit very far: 87% of the households
in Table 2 are found in the sam e or an adjacent
quintile after ten years. Further analysis of the sam -
ple revealed little evidence of age effects, although
this m ay reflect the focus on prim e age m en and
w om en: age effects m ay w ell be larger for the pop-
ulation as a w hole, since this w ould include, for
exam ple, elderly people running dow n their w ealth
in retirem ent.
The groups w ith the highest levels of w ealth
m obility included those aged 3039, the m ore
highly skilled, w orkers in the service sector, higher
educated individuals, w om en, those w hose m arital
status changed, blacks, and those w ho did not ow n
their hom e. These results suggest that there can
be a dark side to w ealth m obility. The higher m obil-
ity of the young, blacks and w om en m ay reflect
loss of earnings, periods of unem ploym ent, epi-
sodes of poor health, divorce and other unhappy
events, as m uch or m ore than they do rising for-
tunes. Som e of these results m ay reflect the condi-
tions prevailing around 1970 in the U SA, so that at
other tim es, or in other places, the relative w ealth
of single people or blacks, for exam ple, could rise
rather than fall. B ut the upw ard w ealth m obility
associated w ith high skills and education seem s
likely to persist, along w ith the dow nw ard m obility
associated w ith divorce, ill health and death of fam -
ily m em bers.
Intergenerational mobility
In addition to w ealth m obility w ithin a generation,
there is also great interest in intergenerational
m obility, w hich has been studied for a long tim e
using probate and tax records on w ealth left at
death. W ealth m obility w ithin and betw een genera-
tions is affected by sim ilar factors, but there are a
couple of significant differences. First, w hile there
is no natural tim e period to study m obility w ithin a
generation, intergenerational w ealth m ovem ents
are invariably considered over a generation (or sev-
eral generations).
Second, estate taxes and patterns of estate divi-
sion have an im pact on intergenerational m obility, but
little or no bearing on m obility w ithin a generation.
Francis G alton pioneered the study of intergen-
erational links in the 19th century, and popularized
the regression tow ard the m eanfram ew ork,
w hich allow s a single param eter to reflect the
degree of m obility, or m ore accurately, the degree
of rigidity, since higher values of indicate low er
m obility. W hen com paring the heights of fathers
and sons, G alton estim ated to be about tw o-
thirds. This is a useful benchm ark for intergenera-
Table 2
Probability (%) of being in a wealth quintile in the 1970s,
given the wealth quintile in the 1960s
S ource: Jam es D avies, Rodrigo Lluberas and A nthony Shorrocks, C redit Suisse G lobal W ealth D atabook 2013.
Wealth quintile in mid-1970s
1 2 3 4 5
Wealth quintile
in mid-1960s
1 62 24 9 3 2
2 27 39 21 10 3
3 8 23 37 26 6
4 5 7 25 41 21
5 2 4 7 20 68
tional m obility, since height is perhaps the inherited
personal characteristic m ost evident and m ost eas-
ily m easured. If w ealth opportunities are open to all,
then m uch low er values of are expected.
An early study of intergenerational w ealth m obil-
ity in the U K traced the close relatives of w ealthy
m ale decedents from the m id-1920s, and found
that about a third of the sam ple had inherited m ost
of their w ealth, another third ow ed their w ealth
partly to inheritance and partly to their ow n efforts,
and a final third appeared to be self-m ade. A sim i-
lar study for the 1960s and 1970s found that the
fraction of self-m ade individuals had increased a
little and the fraction of inheritors w as som ew hat
low er. It also estim ated the regression tow ard the
m eanparam eter and reported values ranging
from 0.48 to 0.59 for the intergenerational w ealth
data. Related U SA w ork for the state of C onnecti-
cut obtained = 0.8 after correcting for sam ple
selection bias. This broadly agrees w ith recent new
evidence based on w ealth data for people w ith rare
surnam es discussed below w hich yields estim ates
of for the U K betw een 0.7 and 0.8. In contrast,
the values of obtained for intergenerational rigid-
ity in earnings, education and occupation in the
U SA, U K, G erm any, Sw eden and other countries
have tended to be som ew hat low er, ranging from
about 0.2 to 0.5. B ut there are good reasons w hy
w ealth m obility is expected to be low er than earn-
ings m obility, so the value of for intergenerational
w ealth is alm ost certain to lie betw een 0.5 and 0.8.
As already noted, the m idpoint of this range is
close to the value obtained for the relationship
betw een the heights of parents and children.
Mobility estimates based on rare surnames
Techniques have recently been developed to m ea-
sure m obility over m ultiple generations based on
people w ith rare surnam es. People w ith com m on
surnam es, like Sm ith and B row n in the U K, have
about the sam e distribution of w ealth as the popu-
lation as a w hole. B ut those w ith a particular rare
surnam e generally do not. This allow s to be esti-
m ated from changes over tim e in the w ealth of
people w ith different rare surnam es.
estate than if he died in 2007, but that does not
m ean that he w as less successful over his lifetim e,
or that the prospects for his descendants are
w orse. These tem porary shocks can obscure or
disguise the underlying persistence of a fam ilys
true econom ic resources. In statistical term s they
cause a dow nw ard bias in . Looking at groups of
people w ith the sam e rare surnam e averages out
som e of these tem porary shocks, rem oving som e
of the bias in estim ated , and m aking it m ore
likely that the true pattern of w ealth m obility w ill be
revealed.
Simulating wealth mobility
To com pensate for the lack of direct evidence on
m any aspects of w ealth m obility, w e have tried to
m odel the underlying process governing w ealth
changes in order to explore w ealth m obility in a
global context. The analysis is based on the
regression tow ard the m eanfram ew ork described
above, w ith param eters chosen so that transitions
betw een quintiles over ten years closely approxi-
m ate the em pirical data reported in Table 2. W e
distinguish betw een regions of the w orld, and m ake
future projections based on the average grow th
rate of w ealth per adult for each region over the
past decade. H ow ever, no attem pt is m ade to
m odel individual country differences, apart from
C hina and India, w hich are treated as separate
regions as usual. The overall fram ew ork is neces-
sarily sim plified. N evertheless, som e interesting
insights em erge.
W e first consider how w ealth m obility varies w ith
the length of tim e betw een observations, the
expectation being that a longer tim e period allow s
greater opportunity for changes in w ealth levels.
W e focus on transitions betw een w ealth quintiles
as in Table 2 and sum m arize the results in a m ore
succinct w ay by m erging the probabilities of jum ps
of one class, tw o classes etc. Thus, Table 2 gener-
ates a 49% chance of rem aining in the sam e quin-
tile over ten years, a 19% chance of m oving up one
group, and so on. The probabilities sum to one and
are depicted in the low est row in Figure 2. In nor-
m al circum stances, a transition m atrix w ill converge
over long periods of tim e to a perfectly m obile
structure for w hich the chance of ending up in any
given state is the sam e for all starting positions.
The elem ents in Table 2 are then identical, and a
probability of 4% is attached to each of the 25
cells. This yields the m obility pattern in Figure 2
labeled perfect m obility.
The interm ediate row s in Figure 2 w ere obtained
by applying the G altonian regression tow ard the
m ean fram ew ork to w ealth estim ates for N orth
Am erica in 2013. The m odel w as calibrated so that
the ten-year transition pattern approxim ates data
for the U SA. W e report results for ten-year inter-
vals up to 60 years and regard 30 years as repre-
senting roughly one generation, and 60 years as
tw o generations or one lifetim e.
In tw o exercises beginning in the early 1800s and
in the m id-1800s, using data spanning five genera-
tions, a study for the U K obtained estim ates of
ranging from 0.7 to 0.8 for pairs of adjacent gen-
erations. Interestingly, these estim ates do not
decline over tim e, suggesting that the m ajor social
and econom ic changes seen in the U K in the last
tw o centuries have had little im pact on intergenera-
tional w ealth m obility. Supporting evidence for high
persistence in social status and w ealth has been
provided by studies of the prevalence of initially
w ealthy rare surnam es in elite occupations or at
elite universities. O ne study looked at the represen-
tation am ong C am bridge and O xford (O xbridge)
students in the U K, physicians, attorneys and
m em bers of parliam ent over the last tw o centuries
of surnam es w hose holders w ere w ealthy in the
1800s. Relative to their occurrence in the popula-
tion at large, these surnam es w ere found to be
over-represented at O xbridge by a factor of 95 in
18001829, and w ere still over-represented by a
factor of 11 in the period 19802009, indicating
that regression tow ard the m ean takes place, but
that convergence is far from com plete even after
180 years. Sim ilar results w ere found for attorneys
and M Ps. For doctors, there w as actually no decline
from 18301859 to 19802009 in the represen-
tation of elite surnam es from the early 1800s.
Surname evidence from other countries
Sim ilarly striking results have been obtained for a
num ber of other countries, including Sw eden,
C hina, Japan, India and the U SA. In Sw eden, for
exam ple, use of noble nam es has been largely lim -
ited to m em bers of fam ilies that belong to the guild
of nobles, the Riddarhuset, founded in 1626.
These nam es are still com m on in the ranks of
w ealthy Sw edes, and are over-represented am ong
professional groups such as physicians. Estim ates
of can also be obtained from these studies of
status and occupation, and are found to lie m ostly
in the range from 0.7 to 0.8.
The very high estim ates of intergenerational
rigidity obtained from analyses based on rare sur-
nam es contrast w ith the evidence on w ealth m obil-
ity over shorter periods of tim e, and w ith evidence
on the source of w ealth of high net w orth individu-
als, w hich tends to suggest that fortunes have
been largely self-m ade in recent years. There are
good reasons to expect that w ealth m obility in the
long run w ill be low er than predicted from forw ard
projections of short-run w ealth m obility. The
regression tow ard the m eanfram ew ork typically
assum es zero correlation in the error term s over
tim e, thus discounting the possibility of random
shocks that last a single generation, or other
changes that m ay be reversed in future years.
M easurem ent error is a classic exam ple of such a
shock, but short-run fluctuations in stock prices
provide another exam ple. A rich investor w ho died
in 2009 w ould likely have left a m uch sm aller P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
P
A
U
L
P
R
E
S
C
O
T
T
7
2

The results show n in Figure 2 conform to expecta-
tions. As the tim e period increases, the chance of
rem aining in the sam e w ealth quintile dim inishes,
and the chance of a large transition im proves. B ut
the tim e gradient is less than m ight have been
anticipated. The probability of being found in the
sam e w ealth quintile is still 36% after one genera-
tion, and 31% after tw o generations. This probabil-
ity w ill eventually shrink to the perfectly m obile
figure of 20% , but it seem s unlikely to get close to
this value for several centuries. N otice that the esti-
m ates do not im ply that 31% rem ain in the sam e
quintile in each of the 60 years: for exam ple, a per-
sons w ealth state can be recorded as unchanged if
they m ove up a couple of quintiles during one tim e
period, and then revert back again later.
C onvergence tow ard the end points of the per-
fectly m obilepattern provides the other m ain indi-
cator of w ealth m obility. O ur estim ates show that
the chance of m oving up or dow n four quintiles is
less than 2% after one generation, and less than
3% after tw o generations, w ell below the 8% that
w ill be achieved if the process continues indefi-
nitely. This again suggests that ten generations or
m ore have to lapse before the w ealth of an indi-
vidual in N orth Am erica is com pletely unrelated to
the w ealth of their ancestors. O ur sim ulations for
N orth Am erica are therefore highly consistent w ith
the relatively im m obile outlook that em erges from
the intergenerational evidence discussed earlier.
Regional variations
Repeating the exercise for other regions yields the
results displayed in Figure 3 for 30-year and
60-year horizons, w ith countries arranged in accor-
dance w ith the probability of upw ard m obility. D if-
ferences across regions are m uch greater than m ay
appear at first sight. N orth Am erica is evidently an
outlier, less m obile than other regions, especially
over longer tim e horizons. Europe is next in line,
follow ed by the m iddle group of Asia-Pacific, Latin
Am erica and Africa. The m ost m obile regions are
C hina and India: both regions are close to being
perfectly m obile over 60 years, and C hina is not far
off even after one generation. C hinas position as
the m ost w ealth m obile region is unlikely to com e
as a surprise, but India is not usually regarded as a
candidate for the m ost m obile region, and N orth
Am erica is not w idely view ed as the least m obile
continent. Although the causes of these regional
differences are not entirely clear, som e aspects of
the explanation can be identified.
The sam e process governing w ealth change has
been applied to all regions, and given the lack of
evidence to the contradictory the sam e param eter
values have been chosen everyw here. So the
explanation cannot be found in the underlying
m odel. O ne obvious factor is w ealth inequality,
since the m obility ranking has som e correspon-
dence w ith the regional values of the G ini coeffi-
cient for w ealth inequality, w hich is highest in Asia-
Figure 2
Simulated probability of moving between wealth quintiles
in North America over different time horizons
Figure 3
Probability of moving between wealth quintiles
over 30 years and 60 years, by region
0 % 10% 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100%
C hange in w ealth quintile
D ow n 4 D ow n 3 N o change U p 1 U p 2 D ow n 2 D ow n 1 U p 3 U p 4
U SA 10 years
10 years
20 years
30 years
40 years
50 years
60 years
Perfect m obility
0 % 10% 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100%
C hange in w ealth quintile
D ow n 4 D ow n 3 N o change U p 1 U p 2 D ow n 2 D ow n 1 U p 3 U p 4
Perfect m obility
30 years
W orld
N orth Am erica
Europe
As|u-Puc|lc
Latin Am erica
Africa
India
C hina
60 years
W orld
N orth Am erica
Europe
As|u-Puc|lc
Latin Am erica
Africa
India
C hina
Pacific, Africa, N orth Am erica and Europe, and
low est in C hina, Latin Am erica and India. The con-
nection w ith m obility betw een w ealth quintiles is
plausible, because a given change in w ealth is
m ore likely to result in a transition betw een quintiles
if w ealth distribution is m ore com pressed. The
grow th rate of w ealth is another obvious factor, not
least because over the past decade India experi-
enced the highest rate of w ealth grow th using a
constant U SD exchange rate. H igher w ealth grow th
w ill m agnify w ealth changes and m ake a transition
to another quintile m ore likely, although the end-
points of the w ealth quintiles w ill also be scaled
accordingly, neutralizing m uch of the im pact. Revi-
sion of the quintile endpoint for the w orld as a
w hole is less correlated w ith the grow th rates of
individual regions, so differences in regional grow th
differences w ill certainly tend to increase m obility
betw een global w ealth quintiles, the pattern for
w hich is also depicted in Figure 3. G lobal w ealth
m obility has sim ilarities w ith the relatively im m o-
bilepattern for N orth Am erica, m ost likely reflect-
ing the very high level of w ealth inequality for the
w orld as a w hole.
The changing structure of the wealth pyramid
O ur final exercise looks at w ealth m obility in the
context of the global pyram id in order to answ er
questions such as: W hat is the chance that a per-
son in C hina today w ith w ealth betw een U SD
10,000 and U SD 100,000 w ill be a m illionaire in 30
yearstim e.As w ill becom e evident, differences in
regional grow th rates have a m ajor im pact on the
rosu|s. Wo oxum|no u |ong |mo hor|.on und in the
absence of an obvious alternative project past
Figure 4
Change in global wealth pyramid over 60 years
grow th rates forw ard. To avoid unnecessary com -
plications, w e also assum e the num ber of adults
rem ains fixed at the 2013 level. These sim plifica-
tions m ean that the follow ing results should not be
regarded as estim ates or predictions, but rather the
outcom e of one w hat ifquestion w hich provides
insights into possible future scenarios.
As Figure 4 show s, future projections based on
average grow th rates during the past decade have
an enorm ous im pact on the structure of the w ealth
pyram id. The fraction of adults w ith w ealth below
U SD 10,000 is 68.7% in 2013, but falls at an
even pace by alm ost a half over a 30-year period.
M ost of the persons displaced m ove to the second
tier w ith w ealth betw een U SD 10,000 and U SD
100,000, causing the fraction of adults in this
range to rise by tw o thirds. B y year 40, tier 2 is the
m ost com m on w ealth range, although tiers 1, 2
and 3 each contain roughly 30% of the global adult
population. Tier 2s pre-em inence is short-lived,
since outw ard m igration from tier 2 to tier 3
exceeds the inw ard m igration from tier 1. The
w ealth range from U SD 100,000 to U SD 1 m illion
has the greatest num ber of w orldw ide m em bers
from year 50 onw ard. M eanw hile, the num ber of
dollar m illionaires accelerates slow ly initially, but the
group has the greatest net inw ard m igration after
40 years. Tw o generations ahead, future extrapola-
tion of current w ealth grow th rates yields alm ost a
billion m illionaires, equivalent to 20% of the total
adult population. If this scenario unfolds, then bil-
lionaires w ill be com m onplace, and there is likely to
be a few trillionaires too eleven according to our
best estim ate.
The regional com position of the pyram id tiers
also changes, driven alm ost entirely by regional
0 % 10% 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100%
< U SD 10 000 U SD 10 000 100 000 USD 100 000 USD 1m > USD 1m Africa India Latin Am erica C hina As|u Puc|lc Europe N orth Am erica
C hanging structure of w ealth pyram id over tim e
Year 0
Year 10
Year 20
Year 30
Year 40
Year 50
Year 60
C om position of pyram id strata by region after 60 years
< U SD 10 000
U SD 10 000 100 000
U SD 100 000 1m
> U SD 1m
C om position of pyram id strata by region in year 0
< U SD 10 000
U SD 10 000 100 000
U SD 100 000 1m
> U SD 1m
im parts a strong structural elem ent to w ealth m obil-
ity. In particular, grow th in the num ber of C hinese
and Indians in the upper reaches of the w ealth
pyram id provides a huge structural m agnet for
upw ard m obility in those countries. The outcom e is
evident in Figure 5 w here, as in Figures 2 and 3,
w e com bine som e of the cells in the underlying
transition m atrix to sum m arize m ore succinctly the
results pertaining to m obility over a 30-year period.
C hina and India have the highest grow th rate
and both regions are characterized by a very high
chance that individuals w ill m ove up exactly one tier
over the course of 30 years. Alm ost half of the C hi-
nese sam ple falls in this category, and the propor-
tion in India is not m uch less. C hina and India also
have in com m on a very sm all probability less than
3% that individuals w ill drop dow nw ard in the
w ealth pyram id. H ow ever, adults in C hina have a
grow th differences. D uring the past decade, the
rate of w ealth grow th at constant U SD exchange
rates has been roughly 8% in India and C hina, 6%
in Latin Am erica and Africa, and 4% in N orth
Am erica and Europe, w ith Asia-Pacific lagging w ith
2% grow th, largely due to the perform ance of
Japan. W hen these rates are extrapolated into the
future, the m uch reduced num ber of adults w ith
w ealth below U SD 10,000 becom es dom inated by
Asia-Pacific w hose share of the m em bership grow s
from 25% in 2013 to 56% in 60 yearstim e (see
Figure 4). In contrast, the fraction from India
w hich starts w ith a sim ilar share in 2013 (23% )
drops to just 3% .
W ith the sam e w ealth grow th rate as India and
higher initial w ealth per adult, C hina sees its m em -
bership of the bottom tier vanish. C hinas m em ber-
ship in the range from U SD 10,000 to U SD
100,000 also shrinks significantly, from 37% in
2013 to 4% in future. The displaced individuals are
found in the w ealth tier above, w here the C hinese
share grow s from 7% to 32% . M ore dram atic still
is the im pact on the m illionaires, w here the fraction
from C hina jum ps from 4% in 2013 to 47% of the
group in 60 yearstim e. The fraction of m illionaires
from India also jum ps by a factor of ten. B ut w hile
the num ber of m illionaires in N orth Am erica, Europe
and Asia-P acific rises significantly in absolute
term s, the percentage share drops from 45% to
14% for N orth Am erica, from 32% to 19% for
Europe, and from 17% to 4% for Asia-Pacific
(excluding C hina and India). To em phasize again,
these are not predictions of future events, but sim -
ply the consequences of extrapolating historical
w ealth grow th rates forw ard for the next 60 years.
Mobility within the global wealth pyramid
The m ajor changes w hich have affected the w ealth
pyram id during the past decade, and w hich w e
assum e w ill continue into the future, have profound
consequences for w ealth transitions because the
upw ard shift of population betw een w ealth ranges
Figure 5
Probability of movement between wealth pyramid strata over 30 years, by region
P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
Y
O
N
G
Y
U
A
N

0 % 10% 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100%
D ow n 3 N o change U p 1 U p 2 D ow n 2 D ow n 1 U p 3
W orld
As|u-Puc|lc
Africa
Europe
N orth Am erica
India
Latin Am erica
C hange in w ealth pyram id strata
C hina
very high chance 24% of m oving up tw o strata,
in contrast to India for w hich the corresponding
value (6% ) is w ell below the figure for Latin Am er-
ica and N orth Am erica (both 15% ), and even lags
the value for the w orld as a w hole (12% ). G iven the
sim ilarity in the w ealth grow th rates of C hina and
India, the source of the different outcom es likely
relates to the pattern of w ealth distribution in the
tw o countries.
At the other end of the m obility scale, alm ost tw o
thirds of Africans are found in the sam e w ealth
range after one generation, and m ore than half of
adults in Asia-Pacific are also im m obile in this
sense. N orth Am erica and Europe are som ew hat
unusual because these regions record the highest
chance of m oving from the bottom stratum to the
m illionaire class: 8% and 5% , respectively, com -
pared to 2% for C hina and 1% for the w orld as a
w hole. B ut these m illionaire entrants in N orth Am er-
ica and Europe are offset by the greater chance of
dow nw ard m obility in these regions, w hich is the
highest in the w orld apart from Asia-Pacific.
Conclusion
W hile the w ealth pyram id changes only gradually
over tim e, there is a great deal of m ovem ent w ithin
it. Individuals and fam ilies rise and fall in the w ealth
distribution. W hen opportunities are m ore equal,
w ealth holdings tend to change w ith greater fre-
quency and m agnitude, and w ealth m obility is
higher. W e have used statistical evidence, and sim -
ulations linked to that evidence, to study patterns of
w ealth m obility in the w orld today. B oth for the pop-
ulation as a w hole, and for those at the top of the
pyram id, there is significant m obility, although not
as m uch as is som etim es thought. W hile som e indi-
viduals do alternate w ildly betw een rags and riches,
m any stay for their w hole lifetim e in the sam e w ealth
neighborhood for people of their age. D ividing the
population into w ealth quintiles, about half the pop-
ulation rem ains in the sam e quintile after ten years,
and w e estim ate that at least a third w ould be in the
sam e quintile after thirty years. Looking across gen-
erations, the latest evidence points to m ore persis-
tence in fam ily w ealth than previously thought.
C rude com parisons of the w ealth of adjacent gen-
erations suggest that virtually com plete m obility
w ould occur over three or four generations. B ut
there is significant persistence if corrections are
m ade for m easurem ent error and other biases, or if
data is used covering several generations.
To explore the im plications of current w ealth
trends and m obility for the future, w e have sim u-
lated the evolution of the global distribution of
w ealth on the assum ption that regional grow th rates
of w ealth per adult over the last decade continue,
and that patterns of w ealth m obility seen w ithin
countries like the U SA also apply in other countries.
The results are illustrative, rather than being predic-
tions or forecasts, since country grow th rates m ay
w ell change. The populations of fast-grow ing coun-
tries like C hina and India are found to rise rapidly in
the w ealth pyram id, w hile the bottom tiers of the
pyram id becom e increasingly dom inated by people
in other countries in the Asia-Pacific region, as w ell
as Africa. W ithin regions, w ealth m obility tends to
be higher w ithin regions w ith m ore equal distribu-
tions of w ealth, and in those w ith higher grow th
rates. Am ong regions, C hina has the highest m obil-
ity, follow ed by India. N orth Am erica has the low est
m obility, w ith Europe just a little m ore m obile. For
the w orld as a w hole, w ealth m obility is sim ilar to
that seen in N orth Am erica and Europe.
The outlook for
wealth to 2018
G lobal w ealth is projected to rise by nearly 40% over the next five years,
reaching U SD 334 trillion by 2018. Em erging m arkets are responsible
for 29% of the grow th, although they account for just 21% of current
w ealth, w hile C hina w ill account for nearly 50% of the increase in
em erging econom iesw ealth. W ealth w ill prim arily be driven by grow th
in the m iddle segm ent, but the num ber of m illionaires w ill also grow
m arkedly over the next five years.
Introduction
G lobal w ealth reached a new all-tim e high in 2013
and is expected to continue rising in the com ing
years. H ow ever, there is great uncertainty regard-
ing the path of w ealth in the future. Like other
econom ic variables, w ealth does not grow at a
steady pace, but is subject to gyrations due to
econom ic cycles and asset price fluctuations.
Financial w ealth in particular is inextricably linked
to stock prices, and can therefore be volatile and
hard to predict. The estim ates in this chapter rep-
resent a central scenario of how w ealth is likely to
evolve over the next five years. H ow ever, several
other outcom es, either better or w orse, are also
possible.
There is considerable scope for global w ealth
grow th to accelerate in the com ing years. Em erg-
ing m arkets tend to grow faster than developed
econom ies. They are now an increasingly im portant
segm ent of the global econom y and are expected
to account for a greater share of w orld w ealth (Fig-
ure 1). In addition, several high-incom e econom ies
in the Eurozone are just exiting from recession,
w hile grow th m om entum elsew here in the devel-
oped w orld is relatively healthy. The increase in
global w ealth w ill also be underpinned by gains in P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
H
A
D
Y
N
Y
A
H
Figure 1
Change in aggregate wealth by income group
Source: C redit Suisse
U SD trillion 40
20
-20
-40
0
D eveloped (high incom e) countries Em erging (low and m iddle incom e)
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2017F 2015F 2013
w orth approaching U SD 100 trillion by 2018.
At todays prices, this corresponds to approxi-
m ately U SD 88 trillion, 23% higher than
the 2013 level (Figure 2). Japan w ill likely
rem ain the second w ealthiest econom y in the
w orld until C hina overtakes it, probably at som e
point in 2016. B y 2018, C hinese w ealth is
expected to approxim ate the level of U S w ealth
in 1993. The Eurozone, currently accounting for
24% of global w ealth, w ill likely see its share
decline a little to 23% . In absolute term s, how -
ever, its w ealth w ill rise by m ore than 29% over
the 5-year period, putting the Eurozone w here
the U S w as in 2011.
Am ong em erging m arkets, it is w orth highlight-
ing the cases of B razil and Indonesia. Since
2000, B razil has seen its w ealth triple equiva-
lent to an annual grow th rate of 10.4% w hile
net w orth in Indonesia has increased m ore than
six-fold. If these rapid rates of grow th continue,
aggregate w ealth in Indonesia w ill rise to w here
the U SA w as in the early 20th century, w hile B ra-
zil w ill im prove by the equivalent of 18 U SA years.
India w ill also see a significant increase in its
w ealth, w hich from a historical point of view, is
expected to take it from w here the U SA w as in
1912 to the U SA level 15 years later (in 1927).
H ow ever, the recent deceleration in grow th in
the m iddle segm ent (w ealth range of U SD 10,000
to 100,000 per adult). The num ber of m illionaires
w orldw ide is projected to rise by 50% to 47.6 m il-
lion by 2018.
Global wealth growth to accelerate slightly
Since 2000, global w ealth at prevailing U SD
exchange rates has increased at an annual rate of
6.2% , lagging the rate of nom inal G D P grow th,
w hich w as 6.6% according to IM F estim ates. This
is due in part to the decline in financial and real
asset prices during the global financial crisis. O ver
the next five years w e believe that the rate of
annual w ealth grow th w ill accelerate by 0.4% to
6.6% . This w ill generate an additional U SD 93 tril-
lion in global w ealth over the five-year forecast
hor|.on, oqu|u|on o un oxru USD !4,900 por
adult. This w ill raise global w ealth in 2018 to U SD
334 trillion, or U SD 67,000 per adult. This forecast
is m ore conservative than last years, w hen w e
anticipated that total w ealth w ould increase by 8%
per annum . The reasons for this dow ngrade include
m ore dem anding equity m arket valuations as w ell
as m ore conservative expectations regarding the
grow th prospects of the global econom y.
The U SA w ill rem ain the undisputed leader
in term s of aggregate w ealth, w ith total net
Figure 2
Total wealth in the USA and relative position of selected economies
Total w ealth in the U S (in trillion U SD , constant prices) Forecast
U SD trillion (2013 prices) 100
90
30
40
50
60
70
80
20
10
0
1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
B
r
a
z
i
l

2
0
1
3
B
r
a
z
i
l

2
0
1
8
C
h
i
n
a

2
0
1
3
C
h
i
n
a

2
0
1
8
I
n
d
o
n
e
s
i
a

2
0
1
7
I
n
d
i
a

2
0
1
3
I
n
d
i
a

2
0
1
8
J
a
p
a
n

2
0
1
3
J
a
p
a
n

2
0
1
8
E
u
r
o
z
o
n
e

2
0
1
3
E
u
r
o
z
o
n
e

2
0
1
8
P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
N
I
K
A
D
A
Figure 3
Wealth share of emerging markets
Figure 4
Evolution of wealth by component
Figure 5
World wealth distribution (% adults)
24 %
22 %
20 %
18 %
16 %
14 %
12 %
10 %
W ealth share of m iddle and low incom e econom ies Forecast
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2016 2014
U SD trillion 250
200
150
100
50
10 %
Real assets Financial assets D ebts
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2016 2014
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
10 %
U SD 0 10 000 U SD 10 000 100 000 U SD 100 000 1m U SD 1m +
2018 2013
68.7
62.8
22.9
27.4
7.7
8.8
0.7 0.9
0 %
these econom ies, as w ell as the w eakness in their
currencies, m eans that there are significant
dow nside risks to this forecast.
Top of the league table
In term s of w ealth per adult, Sw itzerland, Australia
and N orw ay w ill likely rem ain at the top of the
league table, w hile the U SA w ill still be am ong the
top five nations. Large em erging econom ies, such
as B razil, C hina, Russia and South Africa, m ay see
a substantial im provem ent in their w ealth ranking
as a result of relatively high G D P grow th. Am ong
large developing econom ies, w ealth per adult in
Turkm enistan and C hile w ill likely approach the lev-
els of som e developed econom ies, such as Slove-
nia and M alta.
Emerging markets to increase their share
of global wealth
B etw een 2000 and 2013, em erging m arkets nearly
doubled their share of global w ealth from 12% to
21% , thus increasing their share of global w ealth by
0.7% each year. W e expect that the pace of w ealth
generation in em erging m arkets w ill continue to be
greater than that of developed m arkets, although
this difference w ill be less striking in the next five
years. The share of w ealth of em erging m arkets w ill
likely reach 23% by 2018, an increase of 0.5% on
average each year (Figure 3). The annual rate of
increase is projected to be 9.1% for em erging m ar-
kets against 6.1% for developed m arkets.
Am ong m ajor econom ies, C hina w ill likely be the
largest gainer in relative term s. Since 2000, C hi-
nese w ealth has increased by 13.3% per annum ,
and w e expect it to continue to grow at a rapid
pace of 10.1% over the next five years. C hina
accounts for 9.2% of global w ealth, and this w ill
rise to 10.7% , w hile the U SA w ill lose som e share,
but w ill still account for 29% of global w ealth in
2018. W ealth in India w ill also grow very rapidly, at
an annual pace of 9.3% , although a fraction dow n
on the 9.5% grow th rate since 2000. O n a per
adult basis, C hina w ill increase its w ealth by U SD
!2,!00 o USD34,400 und lnd|u by USD !,900
to U SD 6,600.
Financial assets will drive wealth gains
Advances in w ealth w ill result from gains in both
real and financial assets. Financial assets
accounted for m ore than half of gross w ealth dur-
ing the past decade, but the collapse in asset
prices during the financial crisis caused the share
of w ealth to fall in 2008. Since then, financial
assets have staged a rem arkable recovery and are
up 32% (6.4% per annum ) against an increase of
23% (4.8% per annum ) for real assets. W e believe
that financial assets w ill continue to do w ell, and
w ill rise by 7.5% per annum , against an increase of
5% per annum for real assets (Figure 4).
Middle segment
W e expect the m iddle segm ent of the w ealth pyra-
m id individuals w ith w ealth holdings betw een
USD!0,000 und !00,000 o roproson 27.4
or 1.4 billion adults by 2018 (Figure 5). O f the
additional 307 m illion adults in the m iddle segm ent
by 2018, 89% are from Asia-Pacific (including
C hina and India) and an astonishing 58% are from
C hina alone (Figure 6).
Who wants to be a millionaire?
The catching-up process by the em erging econo-
m ies is also evident in the increasing proportion of
m em bers in the top segm ent of global w ealth distri-
bution. O ur estim ates suggest that the num ber of
global m illionaires could exceed 47 m illion in 2018,
a rise of alm ost 16 m illion. W hile the num ber of
m illionaires in em erging econom ies is still far below
the level in the U SA (18.6 m illion) or Europe (15.0
m illion), it is expected to increase substantially in
the next few years. Asia-Pacific is expected to
increase its num ber of m illionaires by 3.8 m illion,
reaching 9 m illion by 2018. C hina could see its
num ber alm ost doubling by 2018, raising the total
to 2.1 m illion. Pushed by B razil (an extra 186,000)
and M exico (an extra 87,000), w e also expect a
substantial increase in the num ber of m illionaires in
Latin Am erica, w hich w ill reach alm ost 1 m illion in
five yearstim e.
Table 1
Number of millionaires in 2013 and 2018
(regions and selected countries)
Number (thousand) Change
2013 2018 (%)
USA 13,216 18,618 41
France 2,211 3,224 46
UK 1,529 2,377 55
Germany 1,735 2,537 46
Brazil 221 407 84
Korea 251 449 79
Mexico 186 273 47
Singapore 174 235 35
Indonesia 123 194 58
Russia 84 133 58
Hong Kong 103 168 63
Turkey 102 158 55
Poland 45 85 89
Malaysia 38 67 76
Chile 54 86 59
Africa 90 163 81
Asia-Pacific 5,266 9,074 72
China 1,123 2,112 88
Europe 10,236 15,027 47
India 182 302 66
LAC 569 936 64
North America 14,213 20,001 41
World 31,680 47,614 50
Figure 6
China wealth distribution (% of adults)
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
10 %
U SD 0 10 000 U SD 10 000 100 000 U SD 100 000 1m U SD 1m +
2018 2013
58.4
41.1
39.1
54.4
2.4
4.3
0.1 0.2
0 %
Methodology
W e project total w ealth at the country level by fore-
casting the tw o com ponents of w ealth financial
and non-financial separately, but by using the
sam e inputs (G D P and inflation) from the IM Fs
latest W orld Econom ic O utlook database.
For aggregate financial w ealth w e estim ate a
5-year projection of m arket value using a dividend
discount m odel at the country level. To com pute the
discount rate w e assum e norm alization in m arket
conditions (risk appetite and volatility). W e estim ate
dividends by using analyst consensus expectations
and trend G D P grow th. Then w e estim ate the
5-year forw ard price target and finally com pute the
corresponding change in m arket value (this typically
grow s at a higher rate than the price index). W e
have estim ates for 42 countries in local currency
and they are converted to dollars using IM F
exchange rate projections.
For non-financial w ealth, w e base our m odel on a
regression of non-financial w ealth on G D P and
inflation and w e produce a forecast based on IM F
projections of these variables. Again, forecasts are
in local currency and they are converted into dollars
using IM F FX projections. For countries w here w e
do not have projections w e use G D P per capita
grow th to forecast net w orth, and assum e that the
percentage in financial/non-financial/debts is the
sam e as for 2013.
P
H
O
T
O
:

I
S
T
O
C
K
P
H
O
T
O
.
C
O
M
/
H
A
D
Y
N
Y
A
H
GLOBAL WEALTH REPORT 2013_45
Wealth
of nations
Countries differ greatly in the levels and pattern of wealth
holdings. The following pages provide a sample of the
variety of country circumstances and the range of
experiences.

While wealth data are good in the rich countries that have most of the worlds wealth, data quality is
patchy elsewhere. The countries discussed below differ with regard to the reliability of the source
material. For each of the countries covered, data quality is rated no worse than fair, meaning that
there is at least an independent source of data on wealth, such as a recent household survey. In
most of the selected countries quality is good, indicating that there is an official household sector
balance sheet as well as an acceptable way to estimate wealth distribution. A satisfactory rating is
given when the data are good but somewhat out of date.

The accompanying charts summarize some of the most important facts, and are typically based on
wealth per adult in US dollars at the prevailing exchange rate. The first chart shows changes in
average wealth for the period 200013. Since exchange-rate fluctuations can alter the apparent
trend, an alternative series is provided for each country using the respective average USD
exchange rate for the 13 years. A typical pattern is a mild decline in average wealth between 2000
and 2002, an increase until 2006 or 2007, and a drop in 2008 with a subsequent recovery.
Generally, wealth in 2013 is higher than in 2000, and in most cases it is now higher than in 2007.
Many currencies appreciated against the US dollar over the period, so wealth growth often appears
slower when measured using average exchange rates.

Countries that show typical features over 200013 include the USA itself (where there is no
exchange rate factor), Canada, Denmark, France and the UK. Some countries, notably China, India
and Indonesia, record significantly above-average growth rates. At the other extreme, J apans
wealth has grown very little in terms of US dollars, and not at all in yen. Experiences varied in the
immediate aftermath of the 2007 financial crisis. The UK, for example, recorded a very large drop
in wealth, but Switzerland registered little decline in US dollar terms. Wealth in most major OECD
economies has now regained or exceeded the 2007 level in constant exchange rate terms.

Our second chart shows the breakdown of countries assets between financial and real (non-
financial) forms, as well as average debt and net worth. Worldwide, financial assets on average
comprise 52% of total gross assets, and debt accounts for 15%. There are several countries,
however, for which financial assets are more important, including J apan, the USA and Switzerland.
At the other extreme, real assets dominate in India and Indonesia, and in Australia and France
among the wealthy countries.

The last chart shows wealth distribution. There are some interesting contrasts. For example, 94%
of adults in India have net worth less than USD 10,000, whereas the corresponding percentage is
only 58% in China. Moreover, the percentage of those with very little wealth is surprisingly high in
some developed countries, while in others it is very low. This reflects such factors as the availability
of credit, including student loans, and the number of young adults who live separately from their
parents, making their wealth more evident in household surveys.

United States

Full steam ahead

The US economy and its stock markets performed well in
201213, leading to a fifth successive year of rising wealth.
Average wealth was USD 192,400 at the turn of the century
and rose fairly steadily until 2006, before falling in the run-up to
the financial crisis. After a fairly tumultuous period, wealth per
adult has fully recovered, and is now 10% above the 2006
level. The forthcoming reduction in monetary stimulus
announced by the Federal Reserve raises doubts about whether
the recovery will continue, but the signs are positive for
household wealth in the immediate future.
The USA is unusual in having a very high proportion of
assets (68%) reported as held in financial form, partly because
it includes business equity wholly as a financial asset. Adopting
the more usual procedure of treating unincorporated enterprises
as part of the household sector, would reduce the share to
about 60%, which is still relatively high. The USA has a larger
number of active shareholders than most other countries.
Besides, compared with many other OECD countries, it has
more economic activity in the private sector than the public
sector, and more outward foreign investment both of which
rely partly on financing by households through their ownership
of bonds, stocks and other financial instruments. Debts of
USD 56,800 per adult are not extreme by international
standards.
Compared to the rest of the world, the USA has a high
proportion of the population with wealth above USD 100,000,
and the percentage becomes even more disproportionate at
higher wealth levels. The USA has by far the greatest number
of members of the top 1% global wealth group, and accounts
for 42% of the worlds millionaires. The number of UHNW
individuals with wealth above USD 50 million is nearly eight
times that of the next country, China.

Country summary 2013

Population 327 million

Adult population 239 million

GDP 68,673 USD per adult

Mean wealth 301,140 USD per adult

Median wealth 44,911 USD per adult

Total wealth 72.1 trillion USD

Dollar millionaires 13,216 thousand

Top 10% of global wealth holders 98,102 thousand


Quality of wealth data good

Figure 1
Wealth per adult over time

Figure 2
Composition of wealth per adult

Figure 3
Wealth distribution relative to world (in %)
Source: J ames Davies, Rodrigo Lluberas and Anthony Shorrocks, Credit Suisse Global
Wealth Databook 2013

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
Wealth per adult at constant exchange rate
-USD 100,000
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
Financial Real Debts Net worth
30.7 33.0 30.7
5.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
United States of America World
Japan

Shock therapy

After two decades of coasting along, J apan is now
experimenting with shock treatment: a combination of fiscal
stimulus and monetary expansion labeled Abenomics. The
results include a small increase in GDP, a large rise in the stock
market, and significant depreciation of the yen. In the year to
mid-2013, wealth grew 2% in yen terms, but dropped 21%
when measured in USD, wiping out household wealth totaling
USD 5.8 trillion.
Despite falling behind over the years in rankings according
to wealth per adult, J apan still ranks second after the USA in
terms of aggregate wealth. It began the new century with
wealth per adult of USD 191,900. Average wealth today is
13% higher in US dollar terms, but 1% lower when measured
in J apanese yen. This decline is due to the combined effect of
the lackluster performance of equities until recently, low interest
rates and investment income, a housing market that has been
on a downward trend since the 1990s, and a reduced saving
rate.
The decline in property values means that financial wealth is
now the major component of household wealth, making up
59% of gross assets. Debts have been declining and are
modest by international standards, at 14% of total assets.
J apan has a relatively equal wealth distribution by
international standards, reflected in a Gini coefficient of 64%.
Together with its high average wealth, this relative equality
means that few individuals have assets below USD 10,000.
The proportion of the population with wealth above
USD 100,000 is over six times the global average. At the turn
of the century, J apan was a close second to the USA regarding
the number of residents in the top 10% and top 1% of global
wealth holders. J apan still retains second place, but the gap
has widened considerably.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
9.2
37.7
50.6
2.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
J apan World
China

Tenacious growth

Wealth per adult in China has grown robustly since 2000,
almost quadrupling from USD 5,700 to USD 22,230 in 2013.
Wealth fell by approximately 20% as a result of the financial
crisis, but soon recovered and despite recent uncertainties is
well above its pre-crisis peak. The level has increased more in
US dollars than in yuan, due to the appreciation of Chinas
currency since 2009; but most of the rise in wealth reflects real
growth.
Total household wealth in China is the third highest in the
world, just 2% behind J apan and 56% ahead of France (in
fourth place). Due to a high savings rate and relatively well
developed financial institutions, a high proportion (46%) of
Chinese household assets are in financial form compared with
other major developing or transition countries. At the same
time, privatized housing, new construction and rural land are
very important forms of wealth in China, accounting for much of
the USD 12,900 in real assets per adult. Debt averages
USD 1,400, equivalent to 6% of gross assets. While this is
relatively low, personal debt has been rising at a fast rate in
recent years.
Although significant inequality is created by the strong
urban-rural divide in China, at the turn of the century overall
wealth inequality was low both by broad international
standards and in comparison to other transition countries. This
was due to factors such as the virtual absence of inherited
fortunes, and relatively equal division of both rural land and
privatized housing. Inequality has been rising strongly, however,
with the increasing wealth of successful entrepreneurs,
professionals and investors. China now has over one million
millionaires, and more residents with wealth above USD 50
million than any other country except the USA.


Population 1,357 million









Quality of wealth data fair

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 5,000
USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
58.4
39.1
2.4
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
China World
India

Emerging wealth

As the worlds largest democracy with a strong federal
structure and vibrant markets, India has seen rapid growth in
wealth since the year 2000. Wealth per adult rose from
USD 2,000 in 2000 to USD 4,700 in 2013, but the 35% rise
in the adult population caused aggregate wealth to more than
triple during the same period. In US dollar terms, there was a
significant contraction in 2008, mostly due to depreciation of
the rupee. The rupee took another dive in 201112, prompting
a 20% decline in wealth in USD terms. Adjusted for exchange
rate movements, however, wealth per capita has grown quite
steadily since 2000, managing an average annual rate of 8%.
Along with most countries in the developing world, personal
wealth in India is heavily skewed towards property and other
real assets, which make up 86% of household assets. Personal
debts are recorded at only USD 296 per adult. However, it is
thought that household liabilities may be significantly
underreported in the large and well-established household
survey used to estimate debt in India, so the true figure may be
much higher.
While wealth has been rising strongly in India, and the ranks
of the middle class and wealthy have been swelling, not
everyone has shared in this growth and there is still a great deal
of poverty. This is reflected in the fact that 94% of the adult
population has wealth below USD 10,000.
At the other end of the scale, a very small proportion of the
population (just 0.4%) has net worth over USD 100,000.
However, due to Indias large population, this translates into
2.8 million people. India has 254,000 members of the top 1%
of global wealth holders, which equates to a 0.5% share. There
are 1,760 UHNW individuals with wealth over USD 50 million
and 770 with more than USD 100 million.


Population 1,263 million






Dollar millionaires 182 thousand


Top 1% of global wealth holders 254 thousand


Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 1,000
USD 2,000
USD 3,000
USD 4,000
USD 5,000
USD 6,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 1,000
USD 0
USD 1,000
USD 2,000
USD 3,000
USD 4,000
USD 5,000
94.4
5.2
0.3 0.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
India World
France

Uncertain prospects

Although the euro crisis has receded for the moment, France
continues to struggle with high unemployment and low growth.
Despite these challenges, it remains seventh in the world in
terms of household wealth per adult.
After the turn of the century, wealth per adult grew very
strongly in France, almost trebling in USD terms between 2000
and 2007. It then decreased by 15% in 2008. Recovery has
proved elusive, although the pre-crisis peak was almost
overtaken this year. Much of the pre-2007 rise was due to the
appreciation of the euro against the US dollar. However,
France also experienced a rapid rise in house prices, as a result
of which real property now accounts for about two-thirds of
household assets. Personal debts are just 12% of household
assets, a relatively low ratio for a developed economy.
The total wealth of French households is very sizeable.
Although just 1.0% of the worlds adults reside in France, in
terms of aggregate household wealth in current USD it ranks
fourth among nations behind China and just ahead of
Germany. Europe as a whole accounts for 34% of individuals in
the top 1% of global wealth holders, but France alone makes
up almost one quarter of the European contingent. This reflects
not only the high average net worth of French households, but
also greater financial inequality than seen in most other EU
countries.
Relatively few households in France are recorded as having
less than USD 10,000 per adult. The proportion with assets
over USD 100,000 is over six times the global average. There
are more millionaires in France than in any other European
country. But above USD 50 million or above USD 100 million,
residents of Germany, Switzerland and the UK outnumber the
French.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 100,000
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
21.7 22.9
50.8
4.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
France World
United Kingdom

Still in recovery

The UK has some of the best data in the world on wealth
holdings, with information on both the level and the distribution
of wealth dating back more than a century. These data
document a substantial decline in wealth concentration from
1900 to about 1970, and the relative stability of the wealth to
income ratio during the same period, with the value lying
between 4 and 5 for much of the time.
The picture changed around 1985, when UK wealth
embarked on a period of sustained growth fuelled by a robust
housing market and good equity returns, which ended with the
financial crisis in 2007. At that time, the wealth-income ratio
had risen above 9, the highest level recorded for any country
except for J apan at the peak of its asset price bubble in the
late-1980s. The subsequent fall in both real property and
financial assets led to a 12% drop in average wealth measured
in pounds sterling, but the simultaneous GBP depreciation
caused wealth per adult in USD to plummet by 36%. Average
wealth in pounds sterling has fluctuated around the pre-crisis
peak in the past few years, but wealth per adult in USD still
remains well below the level achieved in 2007.
Financial and non-financial assets are of roughly equal
importance in the UK. Along with many other countries,
household debt grew quickly as a multiple of income from 1980
onwards, tripling in value to reach 180% in 2008, although the
debt to income ratio has since subsided to 150%. At 17% of
gross wealth, debt is not exceptionally high by international
standards.
Nowadays the pattern of wealth distribution in the UK is
very typical for a developed economy. Slightly more than half
the population has wealth exceeding USD 100,000, and there
are 1.5 million US dollar millionaires. Also, 2.4 million people in
the UK are among the wealthiest 1% in the world.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 100,000
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
18.0
28.8
50.0
3.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
United Kingdom World
Switzerland

Top of the world

Average wealth in Switzerland in 2000 was among the highest
in the world. By 2011, it had more than doubled (expressed in
US dollars), propelling Switzerland to the top of the global
rankings, where it remains today. With wealth per adult of
USD 512,600 in 2013, Switzerland is more than
USD 100,000 ahead of its nearest rival, Australia. However,
most of the rise in wealth since 2000 is due to the appreciation
of the Swiss franc. Measured instead in Swiss francs,
household wealth fell in 2001 and 2002, and then showed a
gentle upward trend, interrupted only by the global financial
crisis.
Given the strength of the Swiss financial sector, it is not
surprising to find that most household wealth is held in financial
assets, whose share of total assets is 56%. Debts average
USD 121,400 per adult, one of the highest levels in the world,
again reflecting the high level of financial development and the
strength of the domestic currency.
Among the small group of advanced countries with long
time series on wealth distribution, Switzerland is the only nation
to display little or no reduction in wealth inequality over the past
century. As a consequence, a large proportion of the Swiss
population is located in the upper echelons of the global
distribution. Switzerland accounts for 1.6% of the top 1% of
global wealth holders, remarkable for a country with just 0.1%
of the worlds adult population. More than 90% of Swiss adults
have assets above USD 10,000 and 49% of the population is
worth more than USD 100,000. Over 3,400 individuals are in
the UHNW bracket, with wealth over USD 50 million, and 900
have net worth exceeding USD 100 million.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 100,000
USD 200,000
USD 300,000
USD 400,000
USD 500,000
USD 600,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 200,000
-USD 100,000
USD 0
USD 100,000
USD 200,000
USD 300,000
USD 400,000
USD 500,000
USD 600,000
5.2
46.0
38.8
10.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Switzerland World

Russia

No sign of growth

At the time of transition there were hopes that Russia would
convert to a high skilled, high income economy with strong
social protection programs inherited from Soviet Union days.
This is almost a parody of what happened in practice. Efforts
were made at the outset to distribute state assets equitably:
most of the housing stock was given away to residents and
shares in Gazprom were allocated to Russian citizens. But other
choice assets in resource-rich companies went to the chosen
few, and subsequent developments in a nation notorious for
weak institutions have reinforced the importance of political
connections rather than entrepreneurial talent.
While recent performance has been bearish, the period
since 2000 as a whole has seen robust growth fuelled by a
world hungry for the natural resources that Russia has in
abundance. Using constant exchange rates, household wealth
has risen over sevenfold, from USD 1,650 in 2000 to
USD 11,900 today. Wealth per adult is above the post-crisis
low, but still remains below the peak in 2007 when the US
dollar bought less than 25 rubles: now it buys 33.
The quality of wealth data for Russia is mixed. Financial
balance sheets are now available and indicate that gross
financial assets average a little over USD 4,000. There is less
information on real assets, but our estimates suggest that they
are twice as high. Personal debt grew by a factor of 20 during
2000-07, and although it seems low in absolute terms, at
USD 2,550 per adult, it amounts to 19% of gross assets.
Russia has the highest level of wealth inequality in the
world, apart from small Caribbean nations with resident
billionaires. Worldwide, there is one billionaire for every USD
170 billion in household wealth; Russia has one for every USD
11 billion. Worldwide, billionaires collectively account for 1%
2% of total household wealth; in Russia today 110 billionaires
own 35% of all wealth.






Median wealth 871 USD per adult






Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 2,000
USD 4,000
USD 6,000
USD 8,000
USD 10,000
USD 12,000
USD 14,000
USD 16,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 4,000
-USD 2,000
USD 0
USD 2,000
USD 4,000
USD 6,000
USD 8,000
USD 10,000
USD 12,000
93.7
5.6
0.6 0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Russia World

Singapore

Robust and stable
growth

Household wealth in Singapore has grown rapidly in recent
years, rising from USD 112,800 at the turn of the century to
USD 281,800 by mid-2013. Most of the rise is due to the high
saving rate and asset price increases rather than exchange rate
movements, although the latter provided a strong boost after
the global financial crisis. Singapore currently ranks eighth in
the world in terms of wealth per adult. Interestingly, it is now
well ahead of Hong Kong, which ranked tenth in the world in
2000, just above Singapore. Wealth in Singapore grew at
7.3% per annum between 2000 and 2013 versus just 2.1%
for Hong Kong. The underlying wealth data for Hong Kong are
poor compared to those for Singapore, but the difference in
these estimated growth rates is credible. A similar difference is
found in the growth rates of per capita GDP: 6.3% per annum
for Singapore compared to 3.1% for Hong Kong.
Household assets in Singapore are divided evenly between
financial and real assets, reflecting strong government
encouragement for both saving and home ownership. The
average debt of USD 54,500 is moderate for a high wealth
country, at just 16% of total assets, although it has grown fairly
quickly in recent years. Singapore publishes official household
balance sheet data, which means that wealth information is
more reliable than for other countries in Southeast Asia, which
lack such high quality data.
The distribution of wealth in Singapore reveals a moderate
level of inequality. J ust 20% of its people have wealth below
USD 10,000, versus 69% for the world as a whole. The
number with wealth above USD 100,000 is about six times the
global average. Reflecting its very high average wealth rather
than high inequality, 0.6% of its population or 262,000
individuals are in the top 1% of global wealth holders, while its
adult population accounts for just 0.1% of the world total.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 100,000
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
20.0
34.2
41.4
4.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Singapore World
Taiwan

Asian Tiger

Taiwan is a prime example of a successful Asian Tiger
economy. Its average wealth is USD 151,800, well above the
level of even the most successful developing and transition
countries, and close to some countries in Western Europe.
Wealth rose from USD 107,000 in the year 2000 to
USD 167,900 in 2010, with no decline during the global
financial crisis of 2007-09. Currency depreciation caused a
12% drop in wealth in USD in 2011, but wealth stayed level in
domestic currency terms and has since edged upwards again.
Over the entire period 2000-13, wealth per adult grew by
2.7% per annum using current USD and by 4.3% per year
using constant exchange rates.
Reflecting a high saving rate and well-developed financial
institutions, the composition of household wealth is skewed
towards financial assets, which comprise 64% of gross assets.
Debt is modest, equaling just 14% of total assets.
Relative to the rest of the world, wealth distribution in
Taiwan is skewed towards the high end, with less than a
quarter of the adult population having wealth below
USD 10,000 compared to 69% in that bottom range for the
world as a whole. Almost a third of adults in Taiwan have net
worth over USD 100,000, which is four times greater than the
worldwide average of 8%. The large number of Taiwanese with
high wealth reflects high average wealth rather than high wealth
inequality: the Gini coefficient of 74% lies in the moderate
range for wealth holdings.











Quality of wealth data satisfactory

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 20,000
USD 40,000
USD 60,000
USD 80,000
USD 100,000
USD 120,000
USD 140,000
USD 160,000
USD 180,000
USD 200,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 40,000
-USD 20,000
USD 0
USD 20,000
USD 40,000
USD 60,000
USD 80,000
USD 100,000
USD 120,000
USD 140,000
USD 160,000
USD 180,000
22.5
45.1
30.8
1.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Taiwan World
Indonesia

Impressive growth

The rise in personal wealth in Indonesia has been very strong,
with the average increasing more than fourfold since the year
2000. The rebound from the Asian financial crisis of 199798
has been impressive. In USD terms, the global financial crisis
caused a small setback, but growth recovered quickly and
wealth per adult is now well above the pre-crisis level. The
declines in wealth observed in 200708 and in 201112 were
due to exchange rate fluctuations. In fact, in terms of domestic
currency, Indonesia has recorded an increase in average wealth
every year this century.
The wealth comparison between Indonesia and India is
noteworthy. In some respects the two countries exhibit
common features. The composition of wealth is similar, with
real assets making up 84% of gross assets in Indonesia
compared to 86% in India. Personal debts in both countries are
very low, averaging just 5% of total assets in Indonesia and 6%
in India. However, although wealth per adult in the two
countries was fairly similar in 2000, with Indonesia just 23%
ahead, the figure for Indonesia is now more than double that for
India. This is in line with the faster pace of growth in
Indonesias GDP, which grew at an average annual rate of
13.1% between 2000 and 2013 compared with 9.9% for
India.
In Indonesia, 81% of adults own less than USD 10,000,
which exceeds the global figure of 69%. At higher wealth
levels, there are progressively smaller numbers in relative terms,
compared with the world as a whole. This reflects the fact that
while wealth has risen strongly in Indonesia in recent years, it is
still low by international standards. However, due to
considerable dispersion in wealth distribution, 175,000 people
in the country are within the top 1% of global wealth holders,
and 123,000 are US dollar millionaires.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3
USD 0
USD 2,000
USD 4,000
USD 6,000
USD 8,000
USD 10,000
USD 12,000
USD 14,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 2,000
USD 0
USD 2,000
USD 4,000
USD 6,000
USD 8,000
USD 10,000
USD 12,000
USD 14,000
81.1
17.6
1.3 0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Indonesia World
Australia

Losing momentum

In US dollar terms, household wealth in Australia grew rapidly
between 2000 and 2013, apart from a brief interlude in 2008.
The average annual growth rate has been 13%, but about half
of the rise is due to exchange rate appreciation. Using constant
exchange rates, wealth has grown on average by just 3.3% per
annum since 2007. Despite this recent slowdown, Australias
wealth per adult in 2013 is USD 402,600, the second highest
in the world after Switzerland. Even more strikingly, its median
wealth of USD 219,500 is the highest in the world.
Interestingly, the composition of wealth is heavily skewed
towards real assets, which amount on average to
USD 294,100 and form 59% of gross household assets. This
average level of real assets is the second highest in the world
after Norway. In part, it reflects a sparsely populated country
with a large endowment of land and natural resources, but it is
also a manifestation of high urban real estate prices.
Compared to the rest of the world, very few Australians
have net worth below USD 10,000. One reason for this is
relatively low credit card and student loan debt. The proportion
of those with wealth above USD 100,000 is the highest of any
country eight times the world average. With 1,762,000
people in the top 1% of global wealth holders, Australia
accounts for 3.8% of this wealthy group, despite having just
0.4% of the worlds adult population.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
USD 350,000
USD 400,000
USD 450,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 200,000
-USD 100,000
USD 0
USD 100,000
USD 200,000
USD 300,000
USD 400,000
USD 500,000
6.9
23.7
62.6
6.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Australia World
South Africa

Emerging problems

Household wealth per adult in South Africa grew vigorously
prior to the global financial crisis, tripling from USD 8,400 in
the year 2000 to USD 25,800 in 2007. Exchange rate
movements had little overall effect during this period. Since
2007, progress has been slower. In constant exchange rate
terms, wealth declined a little in 2008, but growth soon
recovered and gathered pace in 2012-13. Depreciation of the
rand greatly amplified the wealth drop in 2008. This was
reversed the following year, but more recent declines in the
exchange rate have caused wealth per adult in USD terms to
trend downwards since 2010.
Unusually for a developing country, household wealth in
South Africa is largely comprised of financial assets, which
contribute 71% to the average household portfolio. This
reflects a vigorous stock market and sophisticated life
insurance and pension industries, which are key aspects of the
strong modern sector of the economy. Due in part to relatively
low real estate prices, average real assets of USD 7,100 are
not worth much more than the average level of debt
(USD 5,000). South Africa is also unusual among developing
countries in having an official household sector balance sheet,
which provides a more reliable basis for the wealth composition
numbers.
South Africa resembles Indonesia in having a distribution of
wealth which is similar to the distribution for the world as a
whole, although fewer individuals have wealth above
USD 100,000. Nevertheless, we estimate that 62,000 South
Africans are members of the top 1% of global wealth holders
and that 43,000 are USD millionaires. While indicative of
considerable wealth at the top end, these numbers are down a
little from last year, reflecting the fall in the exchange rate.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
USD 30,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 10,000
-USD 5,000
USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
72.3
24.9
2.6 0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
South Africa World

Chile

Sustained growth

Chile has one of the strongest economies in Latin America.
Compared to Argentina and Brazil, for example, its GDP is
growing faster, inflation is lower, and the stock market has
been performing better. Household wealth provides an even
greater contrast. While GDP per capita in Chile is 36% higher
than in Argentina and 26% above Brazil, average wealth in
Chile is more than double that of Brazil and about three times
greater than for Argentina. Since the year 2000, wealth per
capita has risen 181% in terms of current exchange rates and
142% based on constant exchange rates, reflecting the
strength of the peso. Using constant exchange rates, it is
evident that wealth fell only slightly during the global financial
crisis and has been on an upward path since that time.
Chilean households own almost as much financial wealth as
real assets. Holdings of financial assets have been encouraged
by low inflation, well developed financial markets, and pension
arrangements which pioneered the privatization option. The
home ownership rate of 70% is relatively high and contributes
to substantial holdings of real property. At 14.2% of gross
assets, household debts are on the low side by international
standards.
Wealth per adult in Chile is USD 49,000, well above the
world average, and also high relative to most emerging market
countries. Compared with the world as a whole, Chile has many
more people in the USD 10,000100,000 range and fewer
below USD 10,000 or above USD 1 million. Overall inequality
is relatively high, as indicated by a Gini coefficient of 81.4%
and by the fact that Chile has 54,000 millionaires and 76,000
adults in the top 1% of global wealth holders.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 10,000
USD 20,000
USD 30,000
USD 40,000
USD 50,000
USD 60,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 20,000
-USD 10,000
USD 0
USD 10,000
USD 20,000
USD 30,000
USD 40,000
USD 50,000
USD 60,000
45.0
48.0
6.6
0.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Chile World

Brazil

Slumbering giant

Brazils average household wealth has almost tripled since
2000, rising from USD 7,900 per adult to USD 23,300. While
exchange rate movements have caused fluctuations, including
sizeable drops in 2008 and 201113, using current or constant
USD exchange rates makes no difference to the overall rise
over the last 13 years. Current wealth is now well above the
level reached before the global financial crisis on either
exchange rate basis.
Financial assets are of special importance in Brazil. At 42%
of gross assets, they are not far below the 50% benchmark
that represents the rough average for advanced countries. The
strong representation of financial assets has been achieved
despite a stock market decline of about 12% since 2009 and
Brazils earlier history of inflation, which discouraged the
holding of otherwise safe financial assets (e.g. deposits) and
fostered investment in real property. Household liabilities are
21% of gross assets, again reflecting financial development but
also indicate vulnerability of the household sector to fluctuations
in macroeconomic conditions.
Along with several other Latin American countries, Brazil
has more people in the USD 10,000100,000 range relative to
the rest of the world, but fewer numbers in each of the other
ranges. This may give a misleading impression that inequality is
lower than average. In fact, overall inequality is relatively high,
as indicated by the Gini coefficient value of 82% and by the
number of wealthy residents. Brazil has 221,000 millionaires
and 315,000 adults in the top 1% of global wealth holders.
The high level of wealth inequality in part reflects high income
dispersion, which is in turn related to very uneven education
across the population and the divide between formal and
informal sectors of the economy.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
USD 30,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 10,000
-USD 5,000
USD 0
USD 5,000
USD 10,000
USD 15,000
USD 20,000
USD 25,000
66.6
30.5
2.7
0.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Brazil World
Canada

High wire act

With just a mild and short recession in 200809, Canada
weathered the global financial crisis better than the USA. The
long-term rise in real estate was interrupted only briefly, and
since 2008 the market has seen both new construction and
house price increases. Rapid growth in mortgages has fuelled a
continuing rise in household debt. Mortgage terms were
tightened in 2012 and the market cooled somewhat, but there
are continuing concerns. It is not clear whether the final landing
will be soft or hard.
Measured in US dollars, household wealth grew at an
annual rate of 6.7% between 2000 and mid2013.
Discounting exchange rate effects, the rise in wealth is a more
modest 3.7% per annum. The 25% contraction in USD wealth
in 2008 is also much less evident when expressed in Canadian
dollars.
In some respects, the pattern of wealth holdings in Canada
resembles that in the USA: in both countries, for example,
financial assets account for more than half of household
wealth. Canada has lower wealth per adult than the USA, and
the gap grew last year from 9% to 17%, reflecting both USD
appreciation and better stock market performance in the USA.
However, as a result of a more equal wealth distribution,
Canada has much higher median wealth: USD 90,300
compared to USD 44,900 for the USA. Relative to the USA,
Canada has both a smaller percentage of people with less than
USD 10,000 and a larger percentage with wealth above
USD 100,000. It has 993,000 millionaires, and accounts for
3% of the top 1% of global wealth holders, despite having only
0.5% of the worlds population.












Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Wealth per adult
-USD 100,000
-USD 50,000
USD 0
USD 50,000
USD 100,000
USD 150,000
USD 200,000
USD 250,000
USD 300,000
30.0
21.5
44.9
3.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
<USD 10,000 USD 10,000 -
USD 100,000
USD 100,000 -
USD 1m
>USD 1m
Canada World
About the authors
Anthony Shorrocks is D irector of
G lobal Econom ic Perspectives Ltd.
After receiving his PhD from the Lon-
don School of Econom ics (LSE), he
taught at the LSE until 1983, w hen he
becam e Professor of Econom ics at
Essex U niversity, serving also as H ead
of D epartm ent and D irector of Eco-
nom ic Research for the B ritish H ouse-
hold Panel Study. In 2001 he w as
appointed D irector of the W orld Insti-
tute for D evelopm ent Econom ics
Research of the U nited N ations U niver-
sity (U N U -W ID ER) in H elsinki w here he
rem ained until 2009. H e has published
w idely on incom e and w ealth distribu-
tion, inequality, poverty and m obility
and w as elected a Fellow of the Econo-
m etric Society in 1996. Publications
include The age-w ealth relationship:
A cross section and cohort analysis
(Review of Econom ics and Statis-
tics1975), The portfolio com position of
asset holdings in the U nited Kingdom
(Econom ic Journal 1982), and, w ith
Jim D avies and others, Assessing the
quantitative im portance of inheritance
in the distribution of w ealth(O xford
Econom ic Papers 1978), The distri-
bution of w ealth(H andbook of Incom e
D istribution 2000), The w orld distribu-
tion of household w ealthin Personal
W ealth from a G lobal Perspective
(O xford U niversity Press 2008), The
global pattern of household w ealth
(Journal of International D evelopm ent
2009) and The Level and D istribution
of G lobal H ousehold W ealth(Eco-
nom ic Journal 2011).
Jim Davies is a Professor in the
D epartm ent of Econom ics at the U ni-
versity of W estern O ntario in C anada,
w here he has been a faculty m em ber
since 1977 and served as chair of
the departm ent from 1992 to 2001.
H e received his PhD from the London
School of Econom ics in 1979. Jim
w as the director of the Econom ic Policy
Research Institute at U W O from 2001
to 2012. In 2010 he com pleted a
five-year term as m anaging editor of
the academ ic journal C anadian Public
Policy. From 2006 to 2008, he
directed an international research pro-
gram on household w ealth holdings
at U N U -W ID ER in H elsinki and edited
the resulting volum e, Personal W ealth
from a G lobal Perspective(O xford
U niversity Press 2008). H e has
authored tw o books and over 70 arti-
cles and chapters in books on topics
ranging from tax policy to household
saving and the distribution of w ealth.
Publications include The Relative
Im pact of Inheritance and O ther Fac-
tors on Econom ic Inequality(Q uarterly
Journal of Econom ics 1982), W ealth
and Econom ic Inequality(O xford
H andbook of Econom ic Inequality,
O xford U niversity Press, 2009), and
several publications on w ealth authored
jointly w ith Anthony Shorrocks and
others. Jim is also the editor of The
Econom ics of the D istribution of
W ealth, a tw o volum e com pendium
of classic articles that w ill be published
later this year by Edw ard Elgar.
Rodrigo Lluberasis a PhD candidate
in Econom ics at Royal H ollow ay C ol-
lege, U niversity of London and a visit-
ing scholar at the Institute for Fiscal
Studies. H e holds an M Sc in Econom -
ics from U niversity C ollege London and
a B A in Econom ics from U niversidad
de la Republica, U ruguay. Prior to
undertaking his M Sc, he w orked for
three years as an econom ic analyst at
W atson W yatt G lobal Research Ser-
vices and m ore recently as a research
assistant at N ESTA. H is m ain areas
of expertise are pensions, consum ption
and w ealth.
Imprint
General disclaimer / Important information
This docum ent w as produced by and the opinions expressed are those of C redit Suisse as of the date of w riting and are subject to change. It has been prepared
solely for inform ation purposes and for the use of the recipient. It does not constitute an offer or an invitation by or on behalf of C redit Suisse to any person to
buy or sell any security. N othing in this m aterial constitutes investm ent, legal, accounting or tax advice, or a representation that any investm ent or strategy is
suitable or appropriate to your individual circum stances, or otherw ise constitutes a personal recom m endation to you. The price and value of investm ents m entioned
and any incom e that m ight accrue m ay fluctuate and m ay fall or rise. Any reference to past perform ance is not a guide to the future.
The inform ation and analysis contained in this publication have been com piled or arrived at from sources believed to be reliable but C redit Suisse does not m ake
any representation as to their accuracy or com pleteness and does not accept liability for any loss arising from the use hereof. A C redit Suisse G roup com pany
m ay have acted upon the inform ation and analysis contained in this publication before being m ade available to clients of C redit Suisse. Investm ents in em erging
m arkets are speculative and considerably m ore volatile than investm ents in established m arkets. Som e of the m ain risks are political risks, econom ic risks, credit
risks, currency risks and m arket risks. Investm ents in foreign currencies are subject to exchange rate fluctuations. B efore entering into any transaction, you should
consider the suitability of the transaction to your particular circum stances and independently review (w ith your professional advisers as necessary) the specific
financial risks as w ell as legal, regulatory, credit, tax and accounting consequences. This docum ent is issued and distributed in the U nited States by C redit Suisse
Securities (U SA) LLC , a U .S. registered broker-dealer; in C anada by C redit Suisse Securities (C anada), Inc.; and in B razil by B anco de Investim entos C redit
Suisse (B rasil) S.A.
This docum ent is distributed in Sw itzerland by C redit Suisse AG , a Sw iss bank. C redit Suisse is authorized and regulated by the Sw iss Financial M arket
Supervisory Authority (FIN M A). This docum ent is issued and distributed in Europe (except Sw itzerland) by C redit Suisse (U K) Lim ited and C redit Suisse Securities
(Europe) Lim ited, London. C redit Suisse Securities (Europe) Lim ited, London and C redit Suisse (U K) Lim ited, both authorized and regulated by the Financial
Services Authority, are associated but independent legal and regulated entities w ithin C redit Suisse. The protections m ade available by the U Ks Financial Services
Authority for private custom ers do not apply to investm ents or services provided by a person outside the U K, nor w ill the Financial Services C om pensation Schem e
be available if the issuer of the investm ent fails to m eet its obligations. This docum ent is distributed in G uernsey by C redit Suisse (G uernsey) Lim ited, an
independent legal entity registered in G uernsey under 15197, w ith its registered address at H elvetia C ourt, Les Echelons, South Esplanade, St Peter Port,
G uernsey. C redit Suisse (G uernsey) Lim ited is w holly ow ned by C redit Suisse and is regulated by the G uernsey Financial Services C om m ission. C opies of the
latest audited accounts are available on request. This docum ent is distributed in Jersey by C redit Suisse (G uernsey) Lim ited, Jersey B ranch, w hich is regulated
by the Jersey Financial Services C om m ission. The business address of C redit Suisse (G uernsey) Lim ited, Jersey B ranch, in Jersey is: TradeW ind H ouse, 22
Esplanade, St H elier, Jersey JE2 3Q A. This docum ent has been issued in Asia-Pacific by w hichever of the follow ing is the appropriately authorised entity of the
relevant jurisdiction: in H ong Kong by C redit Suisse (H ong Kong) Lim ited, a corporation licensed w ith the H ong Kong Securities and Futures C om m ission or
C redit Suisse H ong Kong branch, an Authorized Institution regulated by the H ong Kong M onetary Authority and a Registered Institution regulated by the
Securities and Futures O rdinance (C hapter 571 of the Law s of H ong Kong); in Japan by C redit Suisse Securities (Japan) Lim ited; elsew here in Asia/Pacific by
w hichever of the follow ing is the appropriately authorized entity in the relevant jurisdiction: C redit Suisse Equities (Australia) Lim ited, C redit Suisse Securities
(Thailand) Lim ited, C redit Suisse Securities (M alaysia) Sdn B hd, C redit Suisse AG , Singapore B ranch, and elsew here in the w orld by the relevant authorized affiliate
of the above.
This docum ent m ay not be reproduced either in w hole, or in part, w ithout the w ritten perm ission of the authors and C RED IT SU ISSE. 2013 C RED IT SU ISSE
G RO U P AG and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved
PUBLISHER
CREDIT SUISSE AG
Research Institute
Paradeplatz 8
C H -8070 Zurich
Sw itzerland
cs.researchinstitute@ credit-suisse.com
PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT
GLOBAL RESEARCH
EDITORIAL &PUBLICATIONS
M arkus Kleeb (H ead)
Ross H ew itt
Katharina Schlatter
AUTHORS
G iles Keating
M ichael O Sullivan
Anthony Shorrocks
Jam es B . D avies
Rodrigo Lluberas
Antonios Koutsoukis
Editorial deadline
17 Septem ber 2013
Additional copies
Additional copies of this publication can be
ordered via the C redit Suisse publication shop
w w w.credit-suisse.com /publications or via your
custom er advisor.
R
C
E

1
5
4
5
7
5
4

1
0
/
2
0
1
3
neutral
Printed Matter
No. 01-13-209907 www.myclimate.org
myclimate The Climate Protection Partnership
PERFORMANCE
CREDIT SUISSE AG
Research Institute
Paradeplatz 8
C H -8070 Zurich
Sw itzerland
cs.researchinstitute@ credit-suisse.com
w w w.credit-suisse.com /researchinstitute
Also published by the Research Institute
Family businesses:
Sustaining
performance
Septem ber 2012
Emerging Consumer
Survey 2012
January 2012
Asian Family
Businesses Report
2011
O ctober 2011
Opportunities in an
urbanizing world
April 2012
From Spring
to Revival
N ovem ber 2011
Gender diversity
and corporate
performance
August 2012
Credit Suisse Global
Investment Returns
Yearbook 2011
February 2011
Investing for
impact
January 2012
Global Wealth
Report 2012
O ctober 2012
Global Wealth
Report 2011
O ctober 2011
Investment Returns
Yearbook 2012
January 2012
The shale revolution
D ecem ber 2012
Emerging Consumer
Survey 2013
January 2013
Investment Returns
Yearbook 2013
February 2013
Sugar
Consumption at
a crossroads
Septem ber 2013

Global Wealth Report 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Wealth Report 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Institute

Thought leadership from Credit Suisse Research

You might also like