Distribution: New wealth, old divides

High global wealth concentration is also reflected in the wide gap between median and average net financial assets. In 2025, global median net financial wealth stood at approximately EUR2,490 per capita, while the average was almost 15 times as high at EUR36,690. The gap, however, has narrowed substantially over time: in 2005, the average was almost 33 times the median. The typical person has therefore gained ground relative to the global average, but the average remains a poor representation of ordinary wealth.

At first glance, the much faster growth of average net wealth in most lower deciles appears encouraging (Figure 31). However, these high growth rates largely reflect extremely low starting points. Even large percentage increases translate into modest absolute gains, while the richest groups continue to accumulate much larger sums. A more equal global distribution of wealth therefore remains a distant prospect.

Net financial wealth is distributed less unevenly within countries than across the world. In 2025, the richest 10% owned an average of 60.9% of national net financial assets across the 57 countries examined, using an unweighted average, compared with 85.4% at the global level. The gap between average and median wealth was also considerably smaller: the national average-to-median ratio was 3.12, again measured as an unweighted average.

When it comes to inequality, however, the national picture is particularly disappointing. Despite being a major political issue for years, there has been virtually no progress towards more even wealth distribution. In 2005, the richest 10% held an average of 60.4% of national wealth, while the average-to-median ratio stood at 3.11. Two decades later, both measures are almost unchanged. Wealth has grown substantially, but its distribution within individual countries has remained remarkably resistant to change.

This overall stability conceals sharper shifts at the country level. In 32 of the 57 countries examined, the share of the richest 10% changed by less than 2pps between 2005 and 2025 (Figure 33). Where larger shifts occurred, however, the balance was clearly tilted towards greater inequality, with deterioration almost twice as likely as improvement. Wealth concentration increased in 16 countries and declined in only nine.

Among those recording an improvement, Cambodia saw the largest decline in the top-decile share, followed by Portugal and Slovakia. Latvia, Hungary, Belgium, Ireland, Malaysia and the Netherlands also registered meaningful decreases. Different starting points were at work. Portugal, Latvia and Ireland moved down from relatively high levels of concentration, while Slovakia, Hungary and the Netherlands improved from already more balanced positions. In the Netherlands, the richest 10% saw their share fall by 2.4pps to 56.1%.

At the other end of the spectrum, China recorded by far the largest increase in concentration. The share of the richest 10% rose by 15.7pps between 2005 and 2025 to 68.0%, well above the average national share of 60.9%. This accompanied the enormous economic and social transformation of the past two decades, which created not only broad-based wealth but also a substantial private upper class. China illustrates the difficulty of combining rapid wealth creation with an equally rapid diffusion of its benefits. After all, it was the unbridled growth of the "wild" 2000s, when the private sector was subject to few restrictions, that primarily caused inequality to rise. In sharp contrast, in the last five years, the concentration of wealth has remained unchanged.

China was not alone. The top-decile share increased by 10.5pps in Russia and by 6.8pps in India, where rising wealth concentration is a “side effect” of rapid growth. Concentration also rose in several advanced economies. In the US, the richest 10% increased their share by 4.0pps to 68.2%, one of the highest levels among advanced markets and with no improvement in sight. Sweden and Switzerland also recorded increases of more than 4pps. France saw a smaller rise of 3.1pps, although its top-decile share of 54.8% remained below Germany’s 59.5%. Rising concentration is therefore not confined to emerging economies, nor does rapid development inevitably produce it.

The ratio of average to median wealth provides an important cross-check: it shows whether rising average wealth is also reflected in the position of the typical household. Across the 57 countries examined, the average ratio remained virtually unchanged, rising from 3.11 in 2005 to 3.12 in 2025. This confirms the broader picture of persistent national wealth inequality (Figure 33).

The strongest improvements occurred in the Netherlands, where the ratio fell from 4.04 to 2.48, and Ireland, where it declined from 4.87 to 3.42. In both countries, the narrowing gap indicates that the middle of the distribution gained ground relative to average wealth.

The largest deteriorations were recorded in Russia, Sweden and China. Russia’s ratio rose from 2.99 to 4.77, while Sweden’s increased from 3.77 to 5.25. In China, it climbed from 2.03 to 3.33. Median Chinese net financial wealth increased substantially, but average wealth grew faster. China thus illustrates a central tension of rapid wealth creation: prosperity can spread while inequality rises at the same time.

More broadly, the limited movement in both distribution measures across most countries suggests that wealth inequality is deeply entrenched. Two decades of economic growth, crises and political attention have barely altered the underlying distribution.