Ranked: The States Where Education Pays Off Most
Published
Design
See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.
Save to Inbox
Ranked: The States Where Education Pays Off Most
See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.
Key Takeaways
- Washington D.C. leads the nation in education and income, with 66% of adults holding a bachelorโs degree and median household income topping $109,000.
- States with the highest shares of college graduates generally report the highest household incomes, highlighting the economic value of educational attainment.
- Alaska stands out as a major exception, earning nearly $96,000 per household despite a relatively low share of college graduates.
A college degree remains one of the strongest predictors of income in America, but the relationship varies considerably across states.
This graphic compares the share of adults with a bachelorโs degree against median household income across all 50 states and Washington D.C., using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. In many states, higher educational attainment coincides with significantly higher household earnings, helping explain why some regions consistently rank near the top for prosperity.
Among the top 10 income states, the average bachelorโs degree attainment rate is roughly 44%, compared with about 29% among the bottom 10 states.
At the same time, several states outperform or underperform what education levels alone might suggest, revealing the role that industry mix, labor demand, and local economic strengths play in shaping incomes.
How Do Education and Income Vary Across America?
The table below shows where Americans are most educated and how much households earn. Educational attainment data is as of 2023, while median household incomes are as of 2024.
| Rank (Income) | State | Share of College Grads | Median Household Income |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | District of Columbia | 66% | $109,707 |
| 2 | Massachusetts | 48% | $104,828 |
| 3 | New Jersey | 44% | $104,294 |
| 4 | Maryland | 44% | $102,905 |
| 5 | Hawaii | 37% | $100,745 |
| 6 | California | 38% | $100,149 |
| 7 | New Hampshire | 41% | $99,782 |
| 8 | Washington | 41% | $99,389 |
| 9 | Colorado | 46% | $97,113 |
| 10 | Utah | 38% | $96,658 |
| 11 | Connecticut | 43% | $96,049 |
| 12 | Alaska | 32% | $95,665 |
| 13 | Virginia | 42% | $92,090 |
| 14 | Delaware | 37% | $87,534 |
| 15 | Minnesota | 40% | $87,117 |
| 16 | New York | 41% | $85,820 |
| 17 | Oregon | 38% | $85,220 |
| 18 | Rhode Island | 39% | $83,504 |
| 19 | Illinois | 38% | $83,211 |
| 20 | Vermont | 44% | $82,730 |
| 21 | Arizona | 34% | $81,486 |
| 22 | Idaho | 32% | $81,166 |
| 23 | Nevada | 29% | $81,134 |
| 24 | Georgia | 35% | $79,991 |
| 25 | Texas | 34% | $79,721 |
| 26 | North Dakota | 34% | $77,871 |
| 27 | Florida | 35% | $77,735 |
| 28 | Pennsylvania | 35% | $77,545 |
| 29 | Wisconsin | 34% | $77,488 |
| 30 | South Dakota | 33% | $76,881 |
| 31 | Maine | 37% | $76,442 |
| 32 | Nebraska | 35% | $76,376 |
| 33 | Wyoming | 30% | $75,532 |
| 34 | Kansas | 36% | $75,514 |
| 35 | Iowa | 32% | $75,501 |
| 36 | Montana | 35% | $75,340 |
| 37 | North Carolina | 37% | $73,958 |
| 38 | Michigan | 33% | $72,389 |
| 39 | South Carolina | 33% | $72,350 |
| 40 | Ohio | 32% | $72,212 |
| 41 | Tennessee | 32% | $71,997 |
| 42 | Indiana | 30% | $71,959 |
| 43 | Missouri | 33% | $71,589 |
| 44 | New Mexico | 32% | $67,816 |
| 45 | Alabama | 29% | $66,659 |
| 46 | Oklahoma | 29% | $66,148 |
| 47 | Kentucky | 28% | $64,526 |
| 48 | Arkansas | 26% | $62,106 |
| 49 | Louisiana | 27% | $60,986 |
| 50 | West Virginia | 24% | $60,798 |
| 51 | Mississippi | 26% | $59,127 |
Where Education Delivers the Biggest Income Advantage
Across the U.S., states with larger shares of college graduates tend to report higher household incomes. Among the highest-income states, bachelorโs degree attainment often exceeds 40%, while many lower-income states have college graduate shares below 30%.
The pattern suggests that educational attainment remains closely linked to household prosperity, even as local economic conditions continue to influence outcomes.
Massachusetts, New Jersey, Colorado, and Washington rank near the top on both measures. These states are home to high-paying industries such as technology, finance, healthcare, and professional services, which attract and reward highly educated workers.
Meanwhile, states with lower educational attainment generally report lower household incomes, reinforcing the long-established connection between education and earnings. The gap is particularly notable in several Southern states, where education rates can be up to 20 percentage points lower than those at the top.
Nationally, bachelorโs degree holders earn about $13,000 more than the median worker, with California seeing the highest wage premium of $23,732 and Wyoming seeing one of the lowest, at $4,051.
When Education Isnโt the Whole Story
While educational attainment helps explain income differences across much of the country, several states challenge the trend.
Alaska is among the most notable examples. Despite ranking well below many top-income states in college graduate share, its median household income approaches $96,000. High-paying jobs in energy, transportation, and resource industries help support earnings that exceed what education levels alone might predict.
At the other end of the spectrum, some highly educated states generate lower incomes than peers with similar graduation rates. For example, Vermontโs 44% grad rate matches New Jersey and Maryland, yet its median income lags $20,000 behind, demonstrating that workforce composition and industry mix remain critical pieces of the equation.
Together, these outliers show that education is only one piece of the economic puzzle.
Why the Degree Advantage Is Evolving
For decades, earning a degree was one of the clearest paths to higher income.
While that relationship remains strong, advances in artificial intelligence and ongoing shifts in the labor market are changing the outlook for many knowledge-based occupations.
As a result, future economic success may depend not only on educational attainment, but also on how effectively states connect skilled workers with industries that have strong labor demand.
Learn More on the Voronoi App 
To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the worldโs most educated countries.
You may also like
Ranked: The Worldโs Most and Least Taxed Countries
Some countries collect over 40% of GDP in taxes. Others collect less than 2%. See how countries around the world compare.
Published
October 1, 2026 5:01 am
How Countries Compare on Tax Revenue
Key Takeaways
- Denmark collects tax revenue equal to 45.3% of GDP, the highest globally, and more than twice the 19.5% collected in the U.S.
- Seven of the 10 countries with the highest tax-revenue shares are in Europe.
- Several oil-rich economies rank near the bottom, where resource revenues can reduce reliance on conventional taxes.
Tax revenue varies dramatically around the world, reflecting differences in tax systems, economic development, and other sources of government income.
Using the latest data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), this graphic compares tax revenue as a share of GDP across countries in 2024.
Compare your country with its peers in the final table on this page.
Where Governments Rely Most on Taxes
Among wealthy economies, the differences are substantial. Denmark collects tax revenue equal to 45.3% of GDP, versus roughly 29% in Canada and Australia and just 19.5% in the United States.
| Rank | Country | Tax Revenue as % of GDP (2024) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ๐ฉ๐ฐ Denmark | 45.3% |
| 2 | ๐ง๐ฌ Bulgaria | 38.8% |
| 3 | ๐ธ๐ช Sweden | 38.7% |
| 4 | ๐ณ๐ฆ Namibia | 35.3% |
| 5 | ๐ฎ๐ธ Iceland | 33.4% |
| 6 | ๐ณ๐ฟ New Zealand | 32.6% |
| 7 | ๐ณ๐ด Norway | 31.3% |
| 8 | ๐ธ๐ฟ Eswatini | 30.7% |
| 9 | ๐ฑ๐บ Luxembourg | 30.7% |
| 10 | ๐ซ๐ฎ Finland | 30.4% |
| 11 | ๐ฎ๐น Italy | 29.6% |
| 12 | ๐ง๐ช Belgium | 29.6% |
| 13 | ๐จ๐ฆ Canada | 29.5% |
| 14 | ๐ฆ๐บ Australia | 29.4% |
| 15 | ๐ฒ๐ช Montenegro | 29.0% |
| 16 | ๐ซ๐ท France | 28.7% |
| 17 | ๐ฌ๐ง UK | 28.5% |
| 18 | ๐ฆ๐น Austria | 28.3% |
| 19 | ๐ฌ๐ท Greece | 27.8% |
| 20 | ๐ง๐ง Barbados | 27.8% |
These differences partly reflect how countries structure their tax systems and fund public services.
Nordic countries generally have broad tax bases that help finance extensive public programs, while the U.S. relies more heavily on private spending in areas such as healthcare and retirement.
The Worldโs Least Taxed Countries
At the other end of the ranking, oil-rich economies sit alongside some of the worldโs poorest countries. Both collect relatively little in taxes, but for very different reasons.
| Rank | Country | Tax Revenue as a % of GDP (2024) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ๐ฑ๐พ Libya | 1.2% |
| 2 | ๐ฐ๐ผ Kuwait | 1.4% |
| 3 | ๐ฎ๐ถ Iraq | 1.7% |
| 4 | ๐พ๐ช Yemen | 2.0% |
| 5 | ๐ธ๐ฉ Sudan | 2.0% |
| 6 | ๐ธ๐ด Somalia | 2.2% |
| 7 | ๐ณ๐ฌ Nigeria | 3.4% |
| 8 | ๐ถ๐ฆ Qatar | 3.8% |
| 9 | ๐ง๐ญ Bahrain | 4.4% |
| 10 | ๐ด๐ฒ Oman | 4.5% |
| 11 | ๐ธ๐ธ South Sudan | 4.8% |
| 12 | ๐ญ๐น Haiti | 5.0% |
| 13 | ๐ฎ๐ท Iran | 5.2% |
| 14 | ๐ฌ๐ถ Equatorial Guinea | 5.5% |
| 15 | ๐ฆ๐ด Angola | 5.6% |
| 16 | ๐ฒ๐ฒ Myanmar | 5.6% |
| 17 | ๐ง๐ณ Brunei | 6.1% |
| 18 | ๐ช๐น Ethiopia | 6.2% |
| 19 | ๐ธ๐ฑ Sierra Leone | 6.4% |
| 20 | ๐ต๐ฆ Panama | 6.7% |
For major oil producers, natural resources provide an alternative source of government revenue. Kuwait collects just 1.4% of GDP in taxes, while Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman are all below 5%.
In lower-income countries, low tax collections can instead reflect large informal economies and limited tax-collection capacity. Similar tax levels can therefore result from resource wealth in one country and difficulty raising revenue in another.
Americaโs Growing Tax and Spending Gap
The U.S. occupies an interesting position in the global comparison. Its tax take is lower than that of many other advanced economies, while federal spending is projected to remain substantially higher than federal revenues.
In 2026, federal spending is projected at 23.3% of GDP, versus revenues of 17.5%. By 2036, those figures are projected to reach 24.4% and 17.8%, respectively. Meanwhile, net interest is projected to more than double to $2.1 trillion, nearly matching all federal discretionary spending.
This leaves a persistent gap between what the federal government collects and what it spends, while a growing share of the budget goes toward servicing past borrowing.
Tax Revenue Around the World
Countriesโ tax revenues vary based on development levels, institutional capacity, tax systems, and resource wealth. The table below lists countries worldwide by tax revenue as a percentage of GDP in 2024.
| Country | Tax Revenue as % of GDP (2024) |
|---|---|
| ๐ฆ๐ซ Afghanistan | 10.9% |
| ๐ฆ๐ฑ Albania | 19.8% |
| ๐ฉ๐ฟ Algeria | 9.4% |
| ๐ฆ๐ฉ Andorra | 15.8% |
| ๐ฆ๐ด Angola | 5.6% |
| ๐ฆ๐ฌ Antigua and Barbuda | 15.6% |
| ๐ฆ๐ท Argentina | 22.8% |
| ๐ฆ๐ฒ Armenia | 22.4% |
| ๐ฆ๐ผ Aruba | 21.0% |
| ๐ฆ๐บ Australia | 29.4% |
| ๐ฆ๐น Austria | 28.3% |
| ๐ฆ๐ฟ Azerbaijan | 17.8% |
| ๐ง๐ญ Bahrain | 4.4% |
| ๐ง๐ฉ Bangladesh | 7.4% |
| ๐ง๐ง Barbados | 27.8% |
| ๐ง๐พ Belarus | 27.2% |
| ๐ง๐ช Belgium | 29.6% |
| ๐ง๐ฟ Belize | 23.2% |
| ๐ง๐ฏ Benin | 13.2% |
| ๐ง๐น Bhutan | 10.8% |
| ๐ง๐ด Bolivia | 17.8% |
| ๐ง๐ฆ Bosnia and Herzegovina | 22.6% |
| ๐ง๐ผ Botswana | 22.4% |
| ๐ง๐ท Brazil | 25.6% |
| ๐ง๐ณ Brunei Darussalam | 6.1% |
| ๐ง๐ฌ Bulgaria | 38.8% |
| ๐ง๐ซ Burkina Faso | 18.8% |
| ๐ง๐ฎ Burundi | 12.1% |
| ๐จ๐ป Cabo Verde | 19.4% |
| ๐ฐ๐ญ Cambodia | 12.5% |
| ๐จ๐ฒ Cameroon | 12.7% |
| ๐จ๐ฆ Canada | 29.5% |
| ๐จ๐ซ Central African Republic | 7.8% |
| ๐น๐ฉ Chad | 7.4% |
| ๐จ๐ฑ Chile | 19.6% |
| ๐จ๐ณ China | 13.0% |
| ๐จ๐ด Colombia | 23.0% |
| ๐ฐ๐ฒ Comoros | 8.9% |
| ๐จ๐ท Costa Rica | 13.2% |
| ๐จ๐ฎ Cote d'Ivoire | 13.6% |
| ๐ญ๐ท Croatia | 27.2% |
| ๐จ๐พ Cyprus | 25.3% |
| ๐จ๐ฟ Czech Republic | 18.9% |
| ๐จ๐ฉ DR Congo | 9.8% |
| ๐ฉ๐ฐ Denmark | 45.3% |
| ๐ฉ๐ฏ Djibouti | 11.0% |
| ๐ฉ๐ฒ Dominica | 22.3% |
| ๐ฉ๐ด Dominican Republic | 14.5% |
| ๐ช๐จ Ecuador | 13.6% |
| ๐ช๐ฌ Egypt | 11.7% |
| ๐ธ๐ป El Salvador | 21.6% |
| ๐ฌ๐ถ Equatorial Guinea | 5.5% |
| ๐ช๐ช Estonia | 22.9% |
| ๐ธ๐ฟ Eswatini | 30.7% |
| ๐ช๐น Ethiopia | 6.2% |
| ๐ซ๐ฏ Fiji | 22.3% |
| ๐ซ๐ฎ Finland | 30.4% |
| ๐ซ๐ท France | 28.7% |
| ๐ฌ๐ฆ Gabon | 13.3% |
| ๐ฌ๐ช Georgia | 24.9% |
| ๐ฉ๐ช Germany | 23.0% |
| ๐ฌ๐ญ Ghana | 13.3% |
| ๐ฌ๐ท Greece | 27.8% |
| ๐ฌ๐ฉ Grenada | 23.6% |
| ๐ฌ๐น Guatemala | 11.8% |
| ๐ฌ๐ณ Guinea | 12.3% |
| ๐ฌ๐ผ Guinea-Bissau | 8.8% |
| ๐ฌ๐พ Guyana | 8.2% |
| ๐ญ๐น Haiti | 5.0% |
| ๐ญ๐ณ Honduras | 17.5% |
| ๐ญ๐ฐ Hong Kong SAR | 14.2% |
| ๐ญ๐บ Hungary | 24.7% |
| ๐ฎ๐ธ Iceland | 33.4% |
| ๐ฎ๐ณ India | 18.1% |
| ๐ฎ๐ฉ Indonesia | 10.1% |
| ๐ฎ๐ท Iran | 5.2% |
| ๐ฎ๐ถ Iraq | 1.7% |
| ๐ฎ๐ช Ireland | 20.5% |
| ๐ฎ๐ฑ Israel | 24.9% |
| ๐ฎ๐น Italy | 29.6% |
| ๐ฏ๐ฒ Jamaica | 25.6% |
| ๐ฏ๐ต Japan | 20.2% |
| ๐ฏ๐ด Jordan | 15.4% |
| ๐ฐ๐ฟ Kazakhstan | 16.0% |
| ๐ฐ๐ช Kenya | 12.9% |
| ๐ฐ๐ฎ Kiribati | 17.5% |
| ๐ฐ๐ท Korea | 13.2% |
| ๐ฝ๐ฐ Kosovo | 27.1% |
| ๐ฐ๐ผ Kuwait | 1.4% |
| ๐ฐ๐ฌ Kyrgyz Republic | 21.8% |
| ๐ฑ๐ฆ Lao P.D.R | 12.4% |
| ๐ฑ๐ป Latvia | 22.8% |
| ๐ฑ๐ง Lebanon | 10.3% |
| ๐ฑ๐ธ Lesotho | 23.5% |
| ๐ฑ๐ท Liberia | 11.6% |
| ๐ฑ๐พ Libya | 1.2% |
| ๐ฑ๐ฎ Liechenstein | 14.5% |
| ๐ฑ๐น Lithuania | 22.3% |
| ๐ฑ๐บ Luxembourg | 30.7% |
| ๐ฒ๐ด Macao SAR | 25.9% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฌ Madagascar | 11.4% |
| ๐ฒ๐ผ Malawi | 14.1% |
| ๐ฒ๐พ Malaysia | 12.5% |
| ๐ฒ๐ป Maldives | 24.3% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฑ Mali | 15.8% |
| ๐ฒ๐น Malta | 23.1% |
| ๐ฒ๐ญ Marshall Islands | 13.9% |
| ๐ฒ๐ท Mauritania | 15.3% |
| ๐ฒ๐บ Mauritius | 23.1% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฝ Mexico | 15.7% |
| ๐ซ๐ฒ Micronesia | 16.5% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฉ Moldova | 21.2% |
| ๐ฒ๐ณ Mongolia | 23.9% |
| ๐ฒ๐ช Montenegro | 29.0% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฆ Morocco | 20.8% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฟ Mozambique | 20.3% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฒ Myanmar | 5.6% |
| ๐ณ๐ฆ Namibia | 35.3% |
| ๐ณ๐ท Nauru | 19.4% |
| ๐ณ๐ต Nepal | 16.4% |
| ๐ณ๐ฑ Netherlands | 26.5% |
| ๐ณ๐ฟ New Zealand | 32.6% |
| ๐ณ๐ฎ Nicaragua | 20.9% |
| ๐ณ๐ช Niger | 6.9% |
| ๐ณ๐ฌ Nigeria | 3.4% |
| ๐ฒ๐ฐ North Macedonia | 18.9% |
| ๐ณ๐ด Norway | 31.3% |
| ๐ด๐ฒ Oman | 4.5% |
| ๐ต๐ฐ Pakistan | 9.9% |
| ๐ต๐ผ Palau | 21.7% |
| ๐ต๐ฆ Panama | 6.7% |
| ๐ต๐ฌ Papua New Guinea | 12.1% |
| ๐ต๐พ Paraguay | 11.4% |
| ๐ต๐ช Peru | 14.3% |
| ๐ต๐ญ Philippines | 15.4% |
| ๐ต๐ฑ Poland | 22.2% |
| ๐ต๐น Portugal | 24.9% |
| ๐ถ๐ฆ Qatar | 3.8% |
| ๐จ๐ฌ Republic of Congo | 10.6% |
| ๐ท๐ด Romania | 16.4% |
| ๐ท๐บ Russia | 19.2% |
| ๐ท๐ผ Rwanda | 13.8% |
| ๐ผ๐ธ Samoa | 24.1% |
| ๐ธ๐ฒ San Marino | 17.6% |
| ๐ธ๐น Sao Tome and Principe | 10.8% |
| ๐ธ๐ฆ Saudi Arabia | 7.2% |
| ๐ธ๐ณ Senegal | 18.2% |
| ๐ท๐ธ Serbia | 23.5% |
| ๐ธ๐จ Seychelles | 27.4% |
| ๐ธ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝ Sierra Leone | 6.4% |
| ๐ธ๐ฌ Singapore | 14.3% |
| ๐ธ๐ฐ Slovak Republic | 19.6% |
| ๐ธ๐ฎ Slovenia | 21.5% |
| ๐ธ๐ง Solomon Islands | 21.4% |
| ๐ธ๐ด Somalia | 2.2% |
| ๐ฟ๐ฆ South Africa | 25.2% |
| ๐ธ๐ธ South Sudan | 4.8% |
| ๐ช๐ธ Spain | 23.9% |
| ๐ฑ๐ฐ Sri Lanka | 12.4% |
| ๐ฐ๐ณ St. Kitts and Nevis | 15.2% |
| ๐ฑ๐จ St. Lucia | 19.7% |
| ๐ป๐จ St. Vincent and the Grenadines | 23.6% |
| ๐ธ๐ฉ Sudan | 2.0% |
| ๐ธ๐ท Suriname | 18.9% |
| ๐ธ๐ช Sweden | 38.7% |
| ๐จ๐ญ Switzerland | 20.0% |
| ๐น๐ฏ Tajikistan | 17.1% |
| ๐น๐ฟ Tanzania | 11.9% |
| ๐น๐ญ Thailand | 16.0% |
| ๐ง๐ธ The Bahamas | 17.3% |
| ๐ฌ๐ฒ The Gambia | 11.1% |
| ๐น๐ฑ Timor-Leste | 9.1% |
| ๐น๐ฌ Togo | 14.9% |
| ๐น๐ด Tonga | 22.0% |
| ๐น๐น Trinidad and Tobago | 21.9% |
| ๐น๐ณ Tunisia | 25.3% |
| ๐น๐ฒ Turkmenistan | 11.9% |
| ๐น๐ป Tuvalu | 17.0% |
| ๐น๐ท Tรผrkiye | 16.6% |
| ๐ฆ๐ช UAE | 18.2% |
| ๐บ๐ฌ Uganda | 12.9% |
| ๐บ๐ฆ Ukraine | 27.4% |
| ๐ฌ๐ง United Kingdom | 28.5% |
| ๐บ๐ธ United States | 19.5% |
| ๐บ๐พ Uruguay | 18.2% |
| ๐บ๐ฟ Uzbekistan | 13.6% |
| ๐ป๐บ Vanuatu | 13.9% |
| ๐ป๐ณ Vietnam | 13.0% |
| ๐ต๐ธ West Bank and Gaza | 25.6% |
| ๐พ๐ช Yemen | 2.0% |
| ๐ฟ๐ฒ Zambia | 17.3% |
| ๐ฟ๐ผ Zimbabwe | 11.6% |
Learn More on the Voronoi App
To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic breaking down income tax revenue by wealth bracket in America.
Ranked: The 10 Youngest U.S. Billionaires on the Forbes 400
Americaโs youngest billionaires are increasingly tied to AI, with seven of the top 10 building fortunes in the industry.
Published
September 30, 2026 8:08 am
Ranked: The 10 Youngest U.S. Billionaires on the Forbes 400
Key Takeaways
- Seven of Americaโs 10 youngest Forbes 400 billionaires built their fortunes in AI.
- Anthropic accounts for four of the 10, with their combined fortunes totaling an estimated $62 billion.
- Nine of the 10 are self-made, but the lone heir, Lukas Walton, is the richest at $44.4 billion.
Artificial intelligence isnโt just creating some of Americaโs most valuable startups. Itโs also creating a new generation of billionaires.
The 2026 Forbes 400 includes founders and executives behind Anthropic, OpenAI, Surge AI, and Cognition among its youngest members, highlighting how quickly AI wealth has risen into the upper ranks of Americaโs richest people.
This visualization ranks the 10 youngest members of the Forbes 400 by age and shows the companies behind their fortunes.
Net worth figures are as of Sept. 4, 2026, and a fortune of at least $4.4 billion was required to make this yearโs Forbes 400.
How AI Is Reshaping Americaโs Youngest Billionaires
The youngest person in the group is 30-year-old Steven Hao, cofounder of AI coding company Cognition, with an estimated fortune of $5.8 billion.
At the other end of the ranking, several billionaires are 39 years old, including Walmart heir Lukas Walton and Anthropic cofounders Daniela Amodei and Tom Brown.
| Name | Age | Net Worth (Billions) | Source of Wealth: |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steven Hao | 30 | $5.8B | Cognition |
| Palmer Luckey | 33 | $5.9B | Anduril |
| Sam McCandlish | 36 | $15.5B | Anthropic |
| Jack Clark | 37 | $15.5B | Anthropic |
| Greg Brockman | 38 | $25.5B | OpenAI |
| Edwin Chen | 38 | $18.0B | Surge AI |
| Daniela Amodei | 39 | $15.5B | Anthropic |
| Tom Brown | 39 | $15.5B | Anthropic |
| Vlad Tenev | 39 | $7.1B | Robinhood |
| Lukas Walton | 39 | $44.4B | Walmart |
Seven names on the list made their fortunes in AI. The remaining fortunes come from Walmart, fintech company Robinhood, and defense technology company Anduril.
Four Anthropic Cofounders Are Worth $15.5 Billion Each
Anthropic accounts for four of the 10 youngest billionaires: Sam McCandlish, Jack Clark, Daniela Amodei, and Tom Brown.
Forbes estimates that each holds a stake worth $15.5 billion, putting their combined fortunes at roughly $62 billion. The four range in age from 36 to 39.
Other AI fortunes include OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman, whose estimated net worth stands at $25.5 billion, Surge AI founder Edwin Chen at $18 billion, and Cognition cofounder Steven Hao at $5.8 billion.
Most of These Fortunes Are Tied to Private Companies
Another defining feature of the ranking is how much of the wealth comes from private companies. Eight of the 10 fortunes are based on private-company stakes valued using recent funding rounds, according to the source note accompanying the Forbes data.
Unlike public stocks, private companies donโt have continuously traded market prices. New funding rounds can reset company valuations and significantly change the estimated paper wealth of major shareholders.
That dynamic is especially important for privately held AI companies, where rising valuations have created multibillion-dollar fortunes well before many of these businesses have reached the public markets.
The Only Heir Is Also the Richest
For all the new wealth being created in technology, the richest person in the ranking represents a much older source of billionaire wealth.
| Name | Source of Wealth: | Self-made or inherited |
|---|---|---|
| Steven Hao | Cognition | Self-made |
| Palmer Luckey | Anduril | Self-made |
| Sam McCandlish | Anthropic | Self-made |
| Jack Clark | Anthropic | Self-made |
| Greg Brockman | OpenAI | Self-made |
| Edwin Chen | Surge AI | Self-made |
| Daniela Amodei | Anthropic | Self-made |
| Tom Brown | Anthropic | Self-made |
| Vlad Tenev | Robinhood | Self-made |
| Lukas Walton | Walmart | Inherited |
At 39, Lukas Walton has an estimated net worth of $44.4 billion stemming from retail giant Walmart. He is the only person among the 10 whose fortune is identified as inherited.
His fortune also stands above every individual AI billionaire shown.
The ranking captures two very different paths to extreme wealth within the same generation: a decades-old retail fortune at the top and a wave of newer fortunes built around some of the worldโs fastest-growing technology companies.
Learn More on the Voronoi App
If you enjoyed todayโs post, check out The Worldโs Richest Person Every Year Since 1987 on Voronoi, the app from Visual Capitalist.
Popular
-
China2 weeks agoRanked: The Worldโs Best Countries at Math in 2026
-
Countries4 weeks agoRanked: The Best and Worst Countries to Live In 2026
-
Debt1 week agoRanked: Countries With the Most Government Debt Per Person
-
Jobs4 days agoMapped: The Best Employer in Every U.S. State
-
Housing3 weeks agoRanked: 100 Global Cities by Quality of Life and Cost
-
Brands3 weeks agoRanked: Cars That Hold and Lose Their Value the Most
-
Money3 weeks agoRanked: Countries With the Highest Debt-to-GDP Ratios
-
Urbanization1 week agoRanked: The Worldโs Strongest City Economies by 2050
