Editing Distribution of wealth (section)

== Wealth inequality ==
{{See also|Criticism of capitalism}}
[[File:Homeless in san francisco mission district California (6086987323).jpg|thumb|A [[Homelessness|homeless]] individual sleeping on the street, next to a [[limousine]]]]
'''Wealth inequality''' refers to uneven distribution of wealth among individuals and entities. Although most research depends on written sources, archaeologists and anthropologists often view large houses as occupied by wealthy households.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=McGuire |first1=R. H. |last2=Netting |first2=R. M. |date=1982 |title=Leveling Peasants? The Maintenance of Equality in a Swiss Alpine Community. |journal=American Ethnologist |volume=9 |issue=2 |pages=269–290|doi=10.1525/ae.1982.9.2.02a00040 }}</ref> The distribution of contemporaneous house sizes in a society (perhaps analyzed using the [[Gini coefficient]]) then can regarded as a measure of wealth inequality. This approach has been used at least since 2014<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=M. E. |last2=Dennehy |first2=T. |last3=Kamp-Whittaker |first3=A. |last4=Colon |first4=E. |last5=Harkness |first5=R. |date=2014 |title=Quantitative measures of wealth inequality in ancient central Mexican communities |journal=Advances in Archaeological Practice |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=311–323|doi=10.7183/2326-3768.2.4.XX }}</ref> and has shown, for example, that ancient wealth disparities in Eurasia were greater than those in North America and in Mesoamerica following the earliest Neolithic period.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kohler |first1=Timothy |last2=Smith |first2=Michael |last3=Bogaard |first3=Amy |last4=Feinman |first4=Gary |last5=Peterson |first5=Christian |last6=Betzenhauser |first6=Alleen |date=2017 |title=Greater post-Neolithic wealth disparities in Eurasia than in North America and Mesoamerica |journal=Nature |volume=551 |issue=7682 |pages=619–622|doi=10.1038/nature24646 |pmid=29143817 |pmc=5714260 |bibcode=2017Natur.551..619K }}</ref>

=== Global inequality statistics ===
[[File:Share of wealth globally.png|thumb|Share of wealth globally by year, as seen by [[Oxfam]],<ref name=":2">{{cite web |date=January 18, 2016 |title=62 people own same as half world – Oxfam &#124; Press releases &#124; Oxfam GB |url=https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2016-01-18/62-people-own-same-half-world-reveals-oxfam-davos-report |access-date=September 10, 2016 |website=Oxfam.org.uk}}</ref> based on the [[net worth]]<ref name="Time">{{cite news |last=Davidson |first=Jacob |date=January 21, 2015 |title=Yes, Oxfam, the Richest 1% Have Most of the Wealth. But That Means Less Than You Think |magazine=Money |url=https://money.com/oxfam-richest-1-wealth-flawed/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220427140631/https://money.com/oxfam-richest-1-wealth-flawed/ |archive-date=April 27, 2022}}</ref>]]A study by the [[World Institute for Development Economics Research]] at United Nations University reports that the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. The bottom half of the world adult population owned 1% of global wealth.<ref name="un-wider">''The World Distribution of Household Wealth''.  James B. Davies, Susanna Sandstrom, Anthony Shorrocks, and Edward N. Wolff.  December 5, 2006.</ref> A 2006 study found that the richest 2% own more than half of global household [[asset]]s.<ref name="really">[https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061205.wxrich05/BNStory/International/home The rich really do own the world] December 5, 2006</ref> The [[Pareto distribution]] gives 52.8% owned by the upper 1%.

According to the OECD in 2012 the top 0.6% of world population (consisting of adults with more than US$1 million in assets) or the 42 million richest people in the world held 39.3% of world wealth. The next 4.4% (311 million people) held 32.3% of world wealth. The bottom 95% held 28.4% of world wealth. The large gaps of the report get by the Gini index to 0.893, and are larger than gaps in global income inequality, measured in 2009 at 0.38.<ref>{{cite web |title=The World Factbook – Central Intelligence Agency |url=https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170716055851/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html |archive-date=July 16, 2017 |access-date=September 10, 2016 |website=Cia.gov}}</ref> For example, in 2012 the bottom 60% of the world population held the same wealth in 2012 as the people on Forbes' Richest list consisting of 1,226 richest billionaires of the world.

A 2021 [[Oxfam]] report found that collectively, the 10 richest men in the world owned more than the combined wealth of the bottom 3.1 billion people, almost half of the entire world population. Their combined wealth doubled during the pandemic.<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 19, 2022 |title=Inequality kills |url=https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/inequality-kills |access-date=April 20, 2022 |website=Oxfam International |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=January 17, 2022 |title=World's 10 richest men see their wealth double during Covid pandemic |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jan/17/world-10-richest-men-see-their-wealth-double-during-covid-pandemic |access-date=April 24, 2022 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=January 17, 2022 |title=Wealth of world's 10 richest men doubled in pandemic, Oxfam says |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60015294 |access-date=April 24, 2022}}</ref>

‘Global wealth Report 2021’, published by Credit Suisse, shows a substantial worldwide increase in wealth inequality during 2020. According to Credit Suisse, wealth distribution pyramid in 2020 shows that the richest group of adult population (1.1%) owns 45.8% of the total wealth. When compared to the 2013 wealth distribution pyramid, an overall increase of 4.8% can be seen. The bottom half of the world’s total adult population, the bottom quartile in the pyramid, owns only 1.3% of the total wealth. Again, when compared to the 2013 wealth distribution pyramid, a decrease of 1.7% can be observed. In conclusion, this comparison shows a substantial worldwide increase in wealth inequality over these years.

One of the main explanations for the ongoing increase of wealth inequality are the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Credit Suisse claims that the economic impact of the pandemic on employment and incomes in 2020 are likely to have a negative effect for the lowest groups of wealth holders, forcing them to spend more from their savings or incur higher debt. On the other hand, top wealth groups appeared to be relatively unaffected in this negative way. Moreover, they seemed to benefit from the impact of lower interest rates on share and house prices.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Global wealth report |url=https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us/en/reports-research/global-wealth-report.html |access-date=April 27, 2022 |website=Credit Suisse |language=en}}</ref><ref name="credit-suisse1">{{cite web |title=Global Wealth Report 2013 |url=https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=BCDB1364-A105-0560-1332EC9100FF5C83 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150214155424/https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=BCDB1364-A105-0560-1332EC9100FF5C83 |archive-date=February 14, 2015 |access-date=June 30, 2016 |publisher=credit-suisse.com}}</ref>

According to the ‘Global Wealth Report 2021’ published by Credit Suisse, there are 56 million millionaires in the world in 2020, increasing by 5.2 million from a year earlier. The biggest number of dollar millionaires is reported in the USA, with 22 million millionaires (approximately 39% of the world total). This is far ahead of China, holding second place, with 9.4% of all global millionaires. The third place is currently being held by Japan, with 6.6% of all global millionaires.<ref name=":3" />

====Real estate====
{{See also|Redlining}}
While sizeable numbers of households own no land, few have no income.  For example, the top 10% of land owners (all corporations) in [[Baltimore, Maryland]] own 58% of the taxable land value.  The bottom 10% of those who own any land own less than 1% of the total land value.<ref>Kromkowski, "Who owns Baltimore", CSE/HGFA, 2007.</ref> This form of analysis as well as [[Gini coefficient]] analysis has been used to support [[land value taxation]].

=== Wealth distribution pyramid ===
[[File:Distribution of wealth globally.jpg|thumb|Pyramid of global wealth distribution in 2013<ref name="credit-suisse1" />]]
In 2013, [[Credit Suisse]] prepared a ''wealth pyramid'' [[infographic]] (shown right). Personal assets were calculated in [[net worth]], meaning wealth would be negated by having any mortgages.<ref name="Time" /> It has a large base of low wealth holders, alongside upper tiers occupied by progressively fewer people. In 2013 Credit-suisse estimate that 3.2 billion individuals – more than two thirds of adults in the world – have wealth below US$10,000. A further one billion (adult population) fall within the 10,000 – US$100,000 range. While the average wealth holding is modest in the base and middle segments of the pyramid, their total wealth amounts to US$40 trillion, underlining the potential for novel consumer products and innovative financial services targeted
at this often neglected segment.<ref name="credit-suisse1" />

The pyramid shows that:
* half of the world's net wealth belongs to the top 1%,
* top 10% of adults hold 85%, while the bottom 90% hold the remaining 15% of the world's total wealth,
* top 30% of adults hold 97% of the total wealth.

==== Wealth distribution pyramid in 2020 ====
In 2020, [[Credit Suisse]] created an updated wealth pyramid infographic. The infographic was constructed similarly to the pyramid in 2013, thus personal assets were calculated in net worth. In 2020, Credit Suisse estimated that approximately 2.88 billion people (55% of adult population) have wealth below US$10,000. Further, 1.7 billion individuals (38.2% of adult population) have wealth within the range of 10,000 – US$100,000. To continue, 583 million people have wealth within the range of 100,000 – US$1,000,000 and approximately 56 million people (1.1% of adult population) have wealth over US$1,000,000.<ref name=":3" />

==== Comparison of 2013 and 2020 pyramids ====
Vast differences between 2013 and 2020 infographic can be observed. For the first time, more than 1% of all global adults have wealth over US$1,000,000. Credit Suisse explains in the ‘Global Wealth Report 2021’, that this increase reflects the economic disruption caused by the pandemic and disconnect between the improvement in the financial and real assets of households. However, the biggest difference can be seen in the 10,000 – US$100,000 segment. Since 2013, there had been an increase of almost 10% of total adult population. According to Credit Suisse, the number of adults in this segment tripled since 2000. Credit Suisse explains this fact by stating that this increase was a result of growing prosperity of emerging economies, especially China, and the expansion of the middle class in the developing world. The upper-middle segment, with wealth in a range of 100,000 – US$1,000,000 has increased by 3.4%. Credit Suisse in the report states that the middle class in developed countries typically belong to this group.<ref name=":3" />

=== Wealth outlook for 2020-2025 ===
According to the ‘Global wealth Report 2021’, published by Credit Suisse, global wealth is projected to rise by 39% over the next five years reaching USD 583 trillion by 2025. Wealth per adult is also projected to increase by 31% and so is the number of global millionaires. The wealth pyramid, an infographic used to determine wealth distribution, will also change. The bottom segment covering adults with a net worth below USD 10,000 will likely decrease by approximately 108 million over the next five years. The lower-middle segment of the pyramid containing adults with a net worth in the range of USD 10,000 and USD 100,000 is projected to rise by 237 million adults. Most of these new members are most likely to be from lower-income countries. The upper-middle segment, consisting of adults with wealth between USD 100,000 and USD 1 million is projected to rise by 178 million adults. Most of these new members (approximately 114 million) are likely to come from upper-middle-income countries. Number of global millionaires is also projected to increase. According to the estimates made by Credit Suisse, the number of global millionaires could exceed 84 million by 2025, a rise of almost 28 million from 2020. The increase of millionaires will not only occur in developed countries such as the USA or other developed countries in Europe, but it is also expected to rapidly increase in lower-income countries. The biggest increase is expected in China, with a change of 92.7%, which is about 4.8 million new dollar millionaires. As a consequence, the number of Ultra High Net Worth Individuals (UHNWI) with net worth exceeding USD 50 million, will also increase.<ref name=":3" />

=== Gini Coefficient ===
[[Gini coefficient]] (or Gini index) is an indicator that is often used to determine wealth inequality. A Gini coefficient of 0 reflects perfect equality, where all income or wealth values are the same, while a Gini coefficient of 1 (or 100%) reflects maximal inequality among values, a situation where a single individual has all the income while all others have none.<ref>{{Cite web |title=United states Census Bureau |url=https://www.census.gov/population/www/cps/cpsdef.html}}</ref> According to the Credit Suisse ‘Global wealth Report 2021’, Brunei had the highest Gini coefficient in 2021 (91.6%), therefore the wealth distribution in Brunei is vastly unequal. Slovakia had the lowest Gini coefficient in 2021 (50.3%) out of all countries, which makes Slovakia the most equal country in terms of wealth distribution. When compared to the report made by Credit Suisse in 2019, an increasing trend of wealth inequality can be observed. This may be the result of repercussions of the Covid-19 pandemic. The biggest increase was recorded in Brazil. The Gini coefficient in 2019 was 88.2% and 89% in 2021, with an increase of 0.8% over this period.<ref name=":4">Source [https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us/en/reports-research/global-wealth-report.html Credit Suisse, Research Institute – Global Wealth Databook 2021]</ref>

The following table was created from information provided by the Credit Suisse Research Institute's "Global Wealth Databook", Table 3-1, published 2021.<ref name=":4" />

{{collapse top |bg=#dfd |title=Click at right to show/hide table with detailed statistics }}

{| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align:right;"
|-
! rowspan="2" | Country
! rowspan="2" | Adults <br />(In 1,000)
! colspan="2" | Wealth per <br />adult (USD)
! colspan="4" | Distribution of adults (%) by wealth range (USD)
! rowspan="2" | Gini <br />(%)
|-
! Mean
! Median
! Under 10k
! 10k – 100k
! 100k – 1M
! Over 1M
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Afghanistan}}|| 18,356 || 1,744 || 734 || 97.6 || 2.4 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 72.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Albania}}|| 2,187 || 30,524 || 15,363 || 41.0 || 54.2 || 4.7 || 0.1 || 68.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Algeria}}|| 27,620 || 8,871 || 2,302 || 87.0 || 11.7 || 1.2 || 0.1 || 84.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Angola}}|| 14,339 || 3,529 || 1,131 || 93.5 || 6.2 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 80.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Argentina}}|| 30,799 || 7,224 || 2,157 || 88.2 || 11.2 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 81.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Armenia}}|| 2,176 || 22,573 || 9,411 || 52.3 || 44.0 || 3.5 || 0.1 || 73.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Australia}}|| 19,159 || 483,755 || 238,072 || 9.8 || 20.7 || 60.0 || 9.4 || 65.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Austria}}|| 7,271 || 290,348 || 91,833 || 14.2 || 36.9 || 44.1 || 4.8 || 73.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Azerbaijan}}|| 7,155 || 11,926 || 5,022 || 73.5 || 25.2 || 1.3 || 0.0 || 72.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bahamas}}|| 278 || 56,737 || 7,507 || 54.0 || 39.7 || 5.7 || 0.6 || 91.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bahrain}}|| 1,318 || 87,559 || 14,520 || 45.0 || 48.0 || 6.1 || 0.9 || 88.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bangladesh}}|| 106,060 || 7,837 || 3,062 || 84.6 || 14.6 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 75.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Barbados}}|| 221 || 63,261 || 21,071 || 41.0 || 46.0 || 12.4 || 0.6 || 80.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Belarus}}|| 7,367 || 23,278 || 12,168 || 45.9 || 51.3 || 2.8 || 0.1 || 66.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Belgium}}|| 8,993 || 351,327 || 230,548 || 11.9 || 20.1 || 62.3 || 5.7 || 60.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Belize}}|| 245 || 10,364 || 3,015 || 82.0 || 16.6 || 1.4 || 0.0 || 83.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Benin}}|| 5,839 || 2,558 || 890 || 95.6 || 4.3 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 78.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bolivia}}|| 7,088 || 12,286 || 3,804 || 78.1 || 20.5 || 1.3 || 0.1 || 81.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bosnia and Herzegovina}}|| 2,637 || 30,597 || 15,283 || 41.0 || 54.1 || 4.8 || 0.1 || 68.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Botswana}}|| 1,358 || 15,598 || 3,680 || 80.0 || 16.8 || 3.1 || 0.1 || 87.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Brazil}}|| 153,307 || 18,272 || 3,469 || 79.5 || 17.5 || 2.8 || 0.1 || 89.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|British Caribbean}}|| 567 || 45,109 || 14,684 || 44.0 || 47.7 || 7.9 || 0.4 || 80.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Brunei}}|| 309 || 39,098 || 5,122 || 64.0 || 32.1 || 3.5 || 0.4 || 91.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Bulgaria}}|| 5,586 || 36,443 || 17,403 || 38.7 || 54.9 || 6.2 || 0.2 || 70.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Burkina Faso}}|| 9,480 || 1,681 || 622 || 98.0 || 1.9 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 76.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Burundi}}|| 5,381 || 728 || 281 || 99.5 || 0.5 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 75.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Cambodia}}|| 10,180 || 5,895 || 2,031 || 90.7 || 8.7 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 78.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Cameroon}}|| 12,716 || 3,042 || 941 || 94.3 || 5.5 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 81.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Canada}}|| 29,934 || 332,323 || 125,688 || 20.7 || 25.1 || 48.6 || 5.6 || 71.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Central African Republic}}|| 2,161 || 840 || 212 || 98.8 || 1.2 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 85.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Chad}}|| 7,059 || 1,117 || 355 || 98.7 || 1.3 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 80.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Chile}}|| 14,259 || 53,591 || 17,747 || 39.1 || 51.6 || 8.8 || 0.5 || 79.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|China}}|| 1,104,956 || 67,771 || 24,067 || 20.9 || 66.1 || 12.5 || 0.5 || 70.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Colombia}}|| 35,612 || 16,928 || 4,854 || 72.0 || 25.4 || 2.5 || 0.1 || 82.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Comoros}}|| 447 || 5,397 || 1,466 || 91.5 || 7.9 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 84.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Congo, Dem. Rep.}}|| 39,740 || 1,240 || 356 || 98.3 || 1.6 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 83.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Congo, Rep.}}|| 2,707 || 2,180 || 582 || 95.6 || 4.2 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 84.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Costa Rica}}|| 3,696 || 44,337 || 14,662 || 44.0 || 47.4 || 8.4 || 0.3 || 79.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Croatia}}|| 3,303 || 69,140 || 34,945 || 27.0 || 57.0 || 15.5 || 0.5 || 68.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Cyprus}}|| 679 || 142,304 || 35,300 || 23.0 || 57.0 || 18.3 || 1.7 || 80.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Czechia}}|| 8,528 || 78,103 || 23,794 || 29.6 || 55.7 || 14.0 || 0.7 || 77.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Denmark}}|| 4,557 || 376,069 || 165,622 || 15.4 || 25.4 || 52.5 || 6.7 || 73.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Djibouti}}|| 618 || 3,112 || 1,077 || 94.0 || 6.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 78.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Dutch Caribbean}}|| 258 || 40,909 || 16,810 || 40.0 || 52.7 || 7.1 || 0.2 || 69.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Ecuador}}|| 11,361 || 17,151 || 5,444 || 69.9 || 27.9 || 2.1 || 0.1 || 80.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Egypt}}|| 59,547 || 19,468 || 6,329 || 66.5 || 30.7 || 2.6 || 0.1 || 79.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|El Salvador}}|| 4,201 || 34,003 || 11,372 || 47.6 || 46.0 || 6.2 || 0.2 || 79.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Equatorial Guinea}}|| 776 || 18,246 || 4,561 || 77.0 || 18.8 || 4.1 || 0.1 || 86.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Eritrea}}|| 1,728 || 2,846 || 1,086 || 95.2 || 4.7 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 75.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Estonia}}|| 1,044 || 77,817 || 38,901 || 30.5 || 53.5 || 15.3 || 0.7 || 73.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Ethiopia}}|| 57,104 || 3,540 || 1,527 || 94.4 || 5.4 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 71.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Fiji}}|| 564 || 15,708 || 5,764 || 69.0 || 28.3 || 2.6 || 0.1 || 77.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Finland}}|| 4,373 || 167,711 || 73,775 || 27.8 || 35.2 || 35.1 || 1.9 || 74.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|France}}|| 49,967 || 299,355 || 133,559 || 14.8 || 27.0 || 53.3 || 4.9 || 70.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|French Caribbean}}|| 631 || 68,443 || 23,740 || 36.0 || 44.0 || 19.5 || 0.5 || 73.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Gabon}}|| 1,216 || 13,696 || 4,685 || 74.0 || 24.5 || 1.4 || 0.1 || 79.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Gambia}}|| 1,115 || 2,500 || 658 || 94.9 || 4.9 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 84.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Georgia}}|| 2,959 || 14,162 || 4,223 || 77.7 || 20.7 || 1.5 || 0.1 || 81.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Germany}}|| 68,015 || 268,681 || 65,374 || 10.6 || 45.2 || 39.8 || 4.3 || 77.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Ghana}}|| 16,617 || 6,132 || 2,198 || 88.5 || 11.1 || 0.4 || 0.0 || 77.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Greece}}|| 8,462 || 104,603 || 57,595 || 22.1 || 49.3 || 27.7 || 0.9 || 65.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Guinea}}|| 6,078 || 2,942 || 938 || 94.5 || 5.4 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 80.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Guinea-Bissau}}|| 949 || 1,828 || 670 || 97.0 || 3.0 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 77.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Guyana}}|| 497 || 12,280 || 4,637 || 74.0 || 24.6 || 1.4 || 0.0 || 76.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Haiti}}|| 6,621 || 767 || 193 || 99.2 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 85.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Hong Kong}}|| 6,292 || 503,335 || 173,768 || 13.7 || 23.7 || 54.3 || 8.3 || 74.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Hungary}}|| 7,769 || 53,664 || 24,126 || 21.4 || 67.6 || 10.7 || 0.3 || 66.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Iceland}}|| 255 || 337,787 || 231,462 || 6.0 || 18.0 || 70.7 || 5.3 || 50.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|India}}|| 900,443 || 14,252 || 3,194 || 77.2 || 21.1 || 1.7 || 0.1 || 82.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Indonesia}}|| 180,782 || 17,693 || 4,693 || 67.2 || 30.8 || 1.9 || 0.1 || 77.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Iran}}|| 57,987 || 22,249 || 7,621 || 59.1 || 37.1 || 3.7 || 0.1 || 78.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Iraq}}|| 21,247 || 14,506 || 6,378 || 68.3 || 30.1 || 1.6 || 0.1 || 71.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Ireland}}|| 3,619 || 266,153 || 99,028 || 30.8 || 19.7 || 44.5 || 5.0 || 80.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Israel}}|| 5,626 || 228,268 || 80,315 || 15.8 || 41.2 || 40.1 || 2.9 || 73.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Italy}}|| 49,746 || 239,244 || 118,885 || 15.5 || 30.1 || 51.4 || 3.0 || 66.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Jamaica}}|| 2,041 || 19,893 || 5,976 || 66.7 || 30.3 || 2.9 || 0.1 || 82.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Japan}}|| 104,953 || 256,596 || 122,980 || 11.0 || 32.6 || 52.9 || 3.5 || 64.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Jordan}}|| 5,866 || 28,316 || 10,842 || 48.3 || 47.1 || 4.5 || 0.2 || 75.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Kazakhstan}}|| 12,226 || 33,463 || 12,029 || 46.3 || 49.3 || 4.2 || 0.2 || 76.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Kenya}}|| 27,473 || 12,313 || 3,683 || 79.6 || 18.8 || 1.5 || 0.1 || 82.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Korea, South}}|| 42,490 || 211,369 || 89,671 || 14.8 || 38.3 || 44.4 || 2.5 || 67.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Kuwait}}|| 3,146 || 129,890 || 28,698 || 42.8 || 44.0 || 10.7 || 2.5 || 86.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Kyrgyzstan}}|| 3,927 || 5,816 || 2,238 || 89.7 || 9.8 || 0.5 || 0.0 || 75.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Laos}}|| 4,288 || 7,379 || 1,610 || 91.6 || 7.0 || 1.3 || 0.0 || 87.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Latvia}}|| 1,477 || 70,454 || 33,884 || 36.0 || 50.5 || 12.7 || 0.8 || 80.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Lebanon}}|| 4,548 || 55,007 || 18,159 || 40.6 || 50.5 || 8.4 || 0.5 || 79.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Lesotho}}|| 1,243 || 1,226 || 264 || 97.8 || 2.2 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 88.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Liberia}}|| 2,502 || 4,453 || 1,464 || 91.9 || 7.8 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 80.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Libya}}|| 4,440 || 17,198 || 6,512 || 67.0 || 31.0 || 1.9 || 0.1 || 76.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Lithuania}}|| 2,166 || 63,500 || 29,679 || 29.3 || 58.0 || 12.2 || 0.5 || 71.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Luxembourg}}|| 498 || 477,306 || 259,899 || 13.0 || 19.0 || 59.2 || 8.8 || 67.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Madagascar}}|| 13,812 || 1,962 || 666 || 96.9 || 3.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 79.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Malawi}}|| 8,887 || 2,045 || 606 || 96.2 || 3.7 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 82.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Malaysia}}|| 22,315 || 29,287 || 8,583 || 55.0 || 41.1 || 3.7 || 0.2 || 82.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Maldives}}|| 409 || 25,511 || 8,519 || 56.0 || 39.3 || 4.5 || 0.2 || 79.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mali}}|| 8,625 || 2,424 || 869 || 96.0 || 3.9 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 77.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Malta}}|| 358 || 148,934 || 84,390 || 13.0 || 45.0 || 40.6 || 1.4 || 61.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mauritania}}|| 2,370 || 2,788 || 1,037 || 95.2 || 4.7 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 76.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mauritius}}|| 968 || 63,372 || 27,456 || 31.0 || 56.0 || 12.5 || 0.5 || 72.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Melanesia}}|| 711 || 31,106 || 12,183 || 46.0 || 48.6 || 5.2 || 0.2 || 75.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mexico}}|| 85,136 || 42,689 || 13,752 || 44.7 || 46.9 || 8.1 || 0.3 || 80.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Micronesia}}|| 341 || 13,193 || 4,876 || 74.0 || 23.9 || 2.1 || 0.0 || 77.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Moldova}}|| 3,188 || 15,491 || 7,577 || 61.8 || 36.5 || 1.7 || 0.0 || 69.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mongolia}}|| 2,053 || 6,324 || 2,546 || 88.0 || 11.5 || 0.5 || 0.0 || 74.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Montenegro}}|| 476 || 60,310 || 30,739 || 29.0 || 57.0 || 13.6 || 0.4 || 68.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Morocco}}|| 24,654 || 13,459 || 3,874 || 78.4 || 19.7 || 1.9 || 0.1 || 81.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Mozambique}}|| 14,186 || 1,003 || 345 || 98.9 || 1.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 79.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Myanmar}}|| 35,734 || 5,025 || 2,458 || 91.7 || 8.0 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 67.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Namibia}}|| 1,375 || 15,294 || 3,677 || 80.5 || 16.4 || 3.0 || 0.1 || 86.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Nepal}}|| 17,887 || 4,056 || 1,437 || 93.3 || 6.3 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 78.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Netherlands}}|| 13,462 || 377,092 || 136,105 || 13.6 || 29.4 || 49.3 || 7.7 || 75.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|New Zealand}}|| 3,600 || 348,198 || 171,624 || 21.2 || 20.0 || 52.5 || 6.3 || 69.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Nicaragua}}|| 4,107 || 12,239 || 3,694 || 78.2 || 20.5 || 1.3 || 0.1 || 81.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Niger}}|| 9,739 || 1,287 || 492 || 98.7 || 1.3 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 75.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Nigeria}}|| 95,931 || 6,451 || 1,474 || 91.7 || 7.6 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 85.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Norway}}|| 4,184 || 275,880 || 117,798 || 28.0 || 19.0 || 48.8 || 4.2 || 78.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Oman}}|| 3,765 || 39,434 || 9,886 || 50.5 || 43.1 || 6.0 || 0.4 || 86.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Pakistan}}|| 123,522 || 5,258 || 2,187 || 90.5 || 9.2 || 0.4 || 0.0 || 73.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Panama}}|| 2,843 || 43,979 || 13,147 || 45.3 || 46.6 || 7.8 || 0.3 || 82.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Papua New Guinea}}|| 4,941 || 6,710 || 1,790 || 91.3 || 7.7 || 1.0 || 0.0 || 84.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Paraguay}}|| 4,454 || 11,962 || 3,644 || 78.8 || 19.9 || 1.2 || 0.1 || 81.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Peru}}|| 22,530 || 17,017 || 5,445 || 70.4 || 27.4 || 2.1 || 0.1 || 80.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Philippines}}|| 66,960 || 15,290 || 3,155 || 83.1 || 14.8 || 2.0 || 0.1 || 86.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Poland}}|| 30,315 || 67,477 || 23,550 || 19.8 || 64.8 || 14.9 || 0.5 || 70.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Polynesia}}|| 423 || 37,998 || 14,076 || 44.0 || 49.3 || 6.4 || 0.3 || 77.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Portugal}}|| 8,339 || 142,537 || 61,306 || 23.2 || 45.1 || 30.0 || 1.6 || 70.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Qatar}}|| 2,396 || 146,730 || 83,680 || 12.0 || 45.3 || 41.7 || 1.0 || 58.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Romania}}|| 15,208 || 50,009 || 23,675 || 32.1 || 58.5 || 9.1 || 0.3 || 70.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Russia}}|| 111,845 || 27,162 || 5,431 || 72.8 || 23.8 || 3.1 || 0.2 || 87.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Rwanda}}|| 6,581 || 4,188 || 1,266 || 92.8 || 6.9 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 81.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Sao Tome and Principe}}|| 104 || 4,029 || 1,702 || 92.4 || 7.3 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 73.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Saudi Arabia}}|| 24,186 || 68,697 || 15,495 || 46.4 || 44.4 || 8.2 || 1.0 || 86.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Senegal}}|| 7,975 || 4,702 || 1,570 || 91.4 || 8.3 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 79.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Serbia}}|| 5,480 || 31,705 || 14,954 || 41.7 || 52.9 || 5.3 || 0.1 || 70.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Seychelles}}|| 69 || 63,427 || 24,651 || 36.0 || 51.0 || 12.5 || 0.5 || 75.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Sierra Leone}}|| 3,937 || 995 || 370 || 99.0 || 0.9 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 76.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Singapore}}|| 4,887 || 332,995 || 86,717 || 16.2 || 38.6 || 39.7 || 5.5 || 78.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Slovakia}}|| 4,346 || 68,059 || 45,853 || 11.6 || 69.8 || 18.4 || 0.2 || 50.3
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Slovenia}}|| 1,672 || 120,173 || 67,961 || 18.0 || 53.0 || 28.2 || 0.8 || 67.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|South Africa}}|| 37,590 || 20,308 || 4,523 || 75.8 || 20.2 || 3.9 || 0.2 || 88.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Spain}}|| 37,798 || 227,122 || 105,831 || 16.7 || 31.6 || 48.6 || 3.0 || 69.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Sri Lanka}}|| 14,732 || 23,832 || 8,802 || 54.3 || 42.0 || 3.7 || 0.1 || 76.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Sudan}}|| 21,941 || 1,014 || 383 || 99.0 || 0.9 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 75.9
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Suriname}}|| 382 || 5,644 || 1,349 || 91.2 || 8.1 || 0.7 || 0.0 || 87.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Sweden}}|| 7,794 || 336,166 || 89,846 || 34.0 || 18.4 || 40.3 || 7.3 || 87.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Switzerland}}|| 6,958 || 673,962 || 146,733 || 11.9 || 33.7 || 43.2
| 11.2 || 78.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Syria}}|| 10,811 || 2,197 || 807 || 96.3 || 3.6 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 77.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Taiwan}}|| 19,633 || 238,862 || 93,044 || 13.9 || 38.6 || 44.4 || 3.1 || 70.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Tajikistan}}|| 5,227 || 4,390 || 1,844 || 92.4 || 7.3 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 73.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Tanzania}}|| 27,744 || 3,647 || 1,433 || 93.7 || 6.1 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 74.5
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Thailand}}|| 54,054 || 25,292 || 8,036 || 55.5 || 41.9 || 2.5 || 0.2 || 77.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Timor-Leste}}|| 689 || 5,185 || 2,838 || 91.4 || 8.3 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 62.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Togo}}|| 4,084 || 1,484 || 468 || 98.0 || 2.0 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 81.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Trinidad and Tobago}}|| 1,032 || 44,182 || 15,649 || 42.5 || 49.0 || 8.2 || 0.3 || 78.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Tunisia}}|| 8,207 || 17,550 || 6,177 || 67.4 || 30.2 || 2.3 || 0.1 || 77.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Turkey}}|| 57,768 || 27,466 || 8,001 || 57.6 || 38.8 || 3.4 || 0.2 || 81.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Turkmenistan}}|| 3,722 || 20,328 || 9,030 || 54.0 || 43.2 || 2.7 || 0.1 || 70.6
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Uganda}}|| 19,830 || 1,994 || 646 || 96.6 || 3.3 || 0.1 || 0.0 || 80.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Ukraine}}|| 34,639 || 13,104 || 2,529 || 79.1 || 19.5 || 1.3 || 0.1 || 84.4
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|United Arab Emirates}}|| 8,053 || 115,476 || 21,613 || 45.1 || 46.0 || 6.8 || 2.1 || 88.8
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|United Kingdom}}|| 52,568 || 290,754 || 131,522 || 18.0 || 27.8 || 49.5 || 4.7 || 71.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|United States}}|| 249,969 || 505,421 || 79,274 || 26.3 || 28.5 || 36.4 || 8.8 || 85.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Uruguay}}|| 2,530 || 60,914 || 22,088 || 37.0 || 51.3 || 11.2 || 0.4 || 77.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Venezuela}}|| 18,359 || 21,040 || 7,341 || 60.5 || 36.8 || 2.5 || 0.1 || 78.1
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Vietnam}}|| 68,565 || 14,075 || 4,559 || 76.3 || 21.9 || 1.8 || 0.1 || 80.2
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Yemen}}|| 15,281 || 5,581 || 1,223 || 93.0 || 6.2 || 0.8 || 0.0 || 88.0
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Zambia}}|| 8,331 || 3,068 || 692 || 94.3 || 5.5 || 0.2 || 0.0 || 87.7
|-
| style="text-align:left" | {{flaglist|Zimbabwe}}|| 7,086 || 7,131 || 2,356 || 86.9 || 12.5 || 0.6 || 0.0 || 79.8
|}

{{collapse bottom}}

===Geographical distribution===
{{Main|World distribution of wealth|List of countries by distribution of wealth|List of countries by income equality}}

Wealth is unevenly distributed across different world regions. At the end of the 20th century, wealth was concentrated among the [[G8]] and Western [[industrialized nations]], along with several [[Asia]]n and [[OPEC]] nations. In the 21st century, wealth is still concentrated among the G8 with United States of America leading with 30.2%, along with other developed countries, several Asia-pacific countries and OPEC countries.[[File:Countries by total wealth (trillions USD), Credit Suisse.png|thumb|270px|Countries by total wealth (trillions USD), [[Credit Suisse]]]]
<gallery>
File:Wdpiechartppp2000.gif|World distribution of wealth by country ([[Purchasing power parity|PPP]])
File:Worldwealthdistribution2000PPP.gif|World distribution of wealth by region (PPP)
File:Wdpiechartexchangerates2000.gif|World distribution of wealth by country (exchange rates)
File:Worldwealthdistributionexchangerates.gif|World distribution of wealth by region (exchange rates)
</gallery>

[[File:Worlds regions by total wealth(in trillions USD), 2018.jpg|thumb|250px|Worlds regions by total wealth (in trillions USD), 2018]]

====By region====
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! rowspan=3 | Region
! colspan=5 | Proportion of world (%)<ref name="Domhoff" /><ref>Data for the following table obtained from [http://www.wider.unu.edu/events/past-events/2006-events/en_GB/05-12-2006/ UNU-WIDER World Distribution of Household Wealth Report] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100716052041/http://www.wider.unu.edu/events/past-events/2006-events/en_GB/05-12-2006/ |date=July 16, 2010 }} ([http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgirs/mgi/mgi-5/ The University of California also hosts a copy of the report])</ref>
|-
! rowspan=2 | Population
! colspan=2 | Net worth
! colspan=2 | GDP
|-
! [[Purchasing power parity|PPP]]
! Exchange rates
! PPP
! Exchange rates
|-
| North America
| 5.2
| 27.1
| 34.4
| 23.9
| 33.7
|-
| Central/South America
| 8.5
| 6.5
| 4.3
| 8.5
| 6.4
|-
| Europe
| 9.6
| 26.4
| 29.2
| 22.8
| 32.4
|-
| Africa
| 10.7
| 1.5
| 0.5
| 2.4
| 1.0
|-
| Middle East
| 9.9
| 5.1
| 3.1
| 5.7
| 4.1
|-
| Asia
| 52.2
| 29.4
| 25.6
| 31.1
| 24.1
|-
| Other
| 3.2
| 3.7
| 2.6
| 5.4
| 3.4
|-
| Totals (rounded)
| 100%
| 100%
| 100%
| 100%
| 100%
|}

World distribution of financial wealth.
In 2007, 147 companies controlled nearly 40 percent of the monetary value of all transnational corporations.<ref name="sciencenews">[http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/333389/title/Financial_world_dominated_by_a_few_deep_pockets Financial world dominated by a few deep pockets]. By Rachel Ehrenberg. September 24, 2011; Vol.180 #7 (p. 13). ''[[Science News]]''. Citation is in the right sidebar. Paper is here [https://arxiv.org/abs/1107.5728] with PDF here [https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf].</ref>

=== In the United States ===
{{Globalize|section|date=October 2022|2=United States}}
{{see also|Wealth inequality in the United States|Income inequality in the United States|Affluence in the United States}}
{{ multiple image |total_width=675 |title=Net personal wealth in the U.S. since 1962, and across age groups
| image1= 1962- Net personal wealth - average in percentile ranges - linear scale - US.svg | caption1= The average personal wealth of people in the top 1% is more than a thousand times that of people in bottom 50%.<ref name=WID_through_2021/>
| image2= 1962- Net personal wealth - average in percentile ranges - logarithmic scale - US.svg | caption2= The logarithmic scale shows how wealth has increased for all percentile groups, though moreso for wealthier people.<ref name=WID_through_2021>{{cite web |title=Evolution of wealth indicators, USA, 1913-2019 |url=https://wid.world/country/usa/ |website=WID.world |publisher=World Inequality Database |access-date=September 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230705011218/https://wid.world/country/usa/ |archive-date=July 5, 2023 |date=2022 |url-status=live }}</ref>
| image3= 2022 Average and median family net worth, by age - US.svg | caption3= ''Average'' net worth—which heavily weights extremely high-wealth families—substantially exceeds ''median'' net worth (families in the fiftieth percentile).<ref name=FedReserveNetWorth_202312/> Further, average net worth outgrew median net worth from 2019 through 2022.<ref name=FedReserveNetWorth_202312>{{cite web |title=Changes in U.S. Family Finances from 2019 to 2022 |url=https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf23.pdf |publisher=Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231225163527/https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf23.pdf |archive-date=December 25, 2023 |page=12 (Table 2) |date=October 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref>
}}
{{multiple image |total_width=675
| image1= 2021 Household wealth by percentile - United States.svg |caption1= Though the 10th percentile of American households have zero net worth, the 90th percentile has $1.6 million of household wealth.<ref name=WealthPercentile_2021>{{cite web |title=The Wealth of Households: 2021 / Current Population Reports / P70BR-183 |url=https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |last1=Sullivan |first1=Brianna |last2=Hays |first2=Donald |last3=Bennett |first3=Neil |page=2 (Table 1) |publisher=United States Census Bureau |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240524023705/https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |archive-date=May 24, 2024 |date=June 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref>
| image2= 2021 Median household wealth, by highest educational attainment - US.svg |caption2= Higher educational attainment in the US correlates with higher household wealth.<ref name=WealthEducation_2021>{{cite web |title=The Wealth of Households: 2021 / Current Population Reports / P70BR-183 |url=https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |last1=Sullivan |first1=Brianna |last2=Hays |first2=Donald |last3=Bennett |first3=Neil |page=5 (Figure 2) |publisher=United States Census Bureau |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240524023705/https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |archive-date=May 24, 2024 |date=June 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref>
| image3= 2021 Median wealth by marital status - US.svg |caption3= Median wealth of married couples is almost three times that of single individuals, regardless of gender and across all age categories.<ref name=WealthMaritalStatus_2021>{{cite web |title=The Wealth of Households: 2021 / Current Population Reports / P70BR-183 |url=https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |last1=Sullivan |first1=Brianna |last2=Hays |first2=Donald |last3=Bennett |first3=Neil |page=5 (Figure 2) |publisher=United States Census Bureau |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240524023705/https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/demo/p70br-183.pdf |archive-date=May 24, 2024 |date=June 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref>
}}
According to [[PolitiFact]], in 2011 the 400 wealthiest Americans "have more wealth than half of all Americans combined."<ref name="PF-20110311">{{cite news |last1=Kertscher |first1=Tom |last2=Borowski |first2=Greg |title=The Truth-O-Meter Says: ''True'' – Michael Moore says 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined |url=http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/ |date=March 10, 2011 |work=[[PolitiFact]] |access-date=August 11, 2013 }}</ref><ref name="HP-20110306">{{cite news |last=Moore |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Moore |title=America Is Not Broke |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/america-is-not-broke_b_832006.html |date=March 6, 2011 |work=[[Huffington Post]] |access-date=August 11, 2013 }}</ref><ref name="MM-20110307">{{cite web |last=Moore |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Moore |title=The Forbes 400 vs. Everybody Else |url=http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/forbes-400-vs-everybody-else |date=March 7, 2011 |website=michaelmoore.com |access-date=August 11, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-date=March 9, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110309211959/http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/forbes-400-vs-everybody-else }}</ref><ref name="CNN-20100922">{{cite news |last=Pepitone |first=Julianne |title=Forbes 400: The super-rich get richer |url=https://money.cnn.com/2010/09/22/news/companies/forbes_400/index.htm |date=September 22, 2010 |work=[[CNN]] |access-date=August 11, 2013 }}</ref> [[Inherited wealth]] may help explain why many Americans who have become rich may have had a "substantial head start".<ref name="Salon-20140324">{{cite web |last=Bruenig |first=Matt |title=You call this a meritocracy? How rich inheritance is poisoning the American economy |url=http://www.salon.com/2014/03/24/death_of_meritocracy_how_inheritance_is_poisoning_the_american_economy/ |date=March 24, 2014 |work=[[Salon (website)|Salon]] |access-date=August 24, 2014 }}</ref><ref name="ECO-20140318">{{cite news |author=Staff |title=Inequality – Inherited wealth |url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2014/03/inequality |date=March 18, 2014 |newspaper=[[The Economist]] |access-date=August 24, 2014 }}</ref> In September 2012, according to the [[Institute for Policy Studies]], "over 60 percent" of the [[Forbes 400|Forbes richest 400 Americans]] "grew up in substantial privilege".<ref name="OW-20120924">{{cite web |last=Pizzigati |first=Sam |title=The 'Self-Made' Hallucination of America's Rich |url=http://inequality.org/selfmade-myth-hallucinating-rich/ |date=September 24, 2012 |work=[[Institute for Policy Studies]] |access-date=August 24, 2014 }}</ref>

In 2007, the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth (excluding human capital),{{clarify|date=December 2019}}<!-- This appears to contradict the >50% held by top 400 stat above, and it's unclear what "human capital" means and if this is any different from the 2011 number, or if they are strongly disagreeing for some reason. --> and the next 19% owned 50.5%.  The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%.  From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976–1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.<ref name="Domhoff" /> Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.<ref name="ForbesJacobs">[https://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2011/11/01/occupy-wall-street-and-the-rhetoric-of-equality/ Occupy Wall Street And The Rhetoric of Equality] ''Forbes'' November 1, 2011, by Deborah L. Jacobs</ref>  However, after the [[Great Recession]] which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%.  The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between [[the 1%]] and [[the 99%]].<ref name="levyinstitute.org">[http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf Working Paper No. 589 ''Recent Trends in Household Wealth in the United States: Rising Debt and the Middle-Class Squeeze – an Update to 2007''] by Edward N. Wolff, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, March 2010</ref><ref name="Domhoff">[http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html Wealth, Income, and Power] by G. William Domhoff of the UC-Santa Barbara Sociology Department</ref><ref name="ForbesJacobs" />

[[Dan Ariely]] and Michael Norton show in a study (2011) that US citizens across the political spectrum significantly underestimate the current US wealth inequality and would prefer a more egalitarian distribution of wealth, raising questions about ideological disputes over issues like taxation and welfare.<ref>Norton, M. I., & [[Ariely]], D., [https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=38500 "Building a Better America – One Wealth Quintile at a Time"], [[Perspectives on Psychological Science]], January 2011 6: 9-12</ref>

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|+ Wealth proportion by population by year (including homes)<ref name="Domhoff" /><ref>1922–1989 data from Wolff (1996), 1992–2010 data from Wolff (2012)</ref>
|-
! style="text-align:left;" | Year
! Bottom <br />99%
! Top <br />1%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1922
| 63.3%
| 36.7%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1929
| 55.8%
| 44.2%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1933
| 66.7%
| 33.3%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1939
| 63.6%
| 36.4%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1945
| 70.2%
| 29.8%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1949
| 72.9%
| 27.1%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1953
| 68.8%
| 31.2%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1962
| 68.2%
| 31.8%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1965
| 65.6%
| 34.4%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1969
| 68.9%
| 31.1%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1972
| 70.9%
| 29.1%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1976
| 80.1%
| 19.9%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1979
| 79.5%
| 20.5%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1981
| 75.2%
| 24.8%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1983
| 69.1%
| 30.9%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1986
| 68.1%
| 31.9%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1989
| 64.3%
| 35.7%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1992
| 62.8%
| 37.2%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1995
| 61.5%
| 38.5%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1998
| 61.9%
| 38.1%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2001
| 66.6%
| 33.4%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2004
| 65.7%
| 34.3%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2007
| 65.4%
| 34.6%
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2010
| 64.6%
| 35.4%
|}
[[File:Total US family wealth timeline by wealth group.png|thumb|upright=1.55|Trends in the distribution of family wealth, 1989 to 2022. [[Congressional Budget Office]].<ref name=CBO-trends>{{cite web |title=Trends in the Distribution of Family Wealth, 1989 to 2022 |url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60807 |website=[[Congressional Budget Office]] |language=en |date=2 October 2024}}</ref>]]