The World’s Most (and Least) Religiously Diverse Countries This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources. Key Takeaways Singapore ranks #1 globally, with the most even mix of religions. Several Middle Eastern countries rank among the least diverse, with near-zero scores. North America saw some of the biggest increases in religious diversity since 2010. Religious diversity ranges from highly mixed societies to countries where a single faith dominates almost entirely. This map by Iswardi Ishak shows the Religious Diversity Index (RDI) across 201 countries, based on data from the Pew Research Center. The index measures how evenly populations are distributed across religions, with higher scores indicating a more balanced mix. Singapore ranks #1 globally, with no single religious group forming a majority. At the other extreme, countries like Yemen and Afghanistan have near-zero diversity, highlighting how uneven religious distribution can be worldwide. Ranking: Countries by Religious Diversity Here’s a look at the full dataset on religious diversity by country: RankCountryRDI scoreDiversity level 1 Singapore9.25Very high 2 Suriname7.54Very high 3 Taiwan7.46Very high 4 South Korea7.33Very high 5 Mauritius7.33Very high 6 Guinea-Bissau7.17Very high 7 Togo7.09Very high 8 Benin7.05Very high 9 Australia6.99High 10 France6.93High 11 Canada6.91High 12 United Kingdom6.88High 13 Belgium6.80High 14 Ivory Coast6.76High 15 Netherlands6.76High 16 New Zealand6.67High 17 Mongolia6.64High 18 Mozambique6.57High 19 Cuba6.48High 20 Germany6.40High 21 Malaysia6.31High 22 Sweden6.30High 23 Estonia6.21High 24 Japan6.18High 25 Chad6.18High 26 Uruguay6.14High 27 Switzerland6.09High 28 South Sudan6.09High 29 Eritrea6.01High 30 Bosnia-Herzegovina5.98High 31 Guyana5.90High 32 United States5.85High 33 Luxembourg5.81High 34 Nigeria5.81High 35 Macao5.76High 36 Tanzania5.72High 37 Ethiopia5.71High 38 Vietnam5.62High 39 Sri Lanka5.61High 40 Austria5.58High 41 Cyprus5.57High 42 Laos5.49Moderate 43 Slovenia5.46Moderate 44 Jamaica5.45Moderate 45 Burkina Faso5.43Moderate 46 Trinidad and Tobago5.41Moderate 47 Russia5.41Moderate 48 North Macedonia5.38Moderate 49 Lebanon5.38Moderate 50 Fiji5.31Moderate 51 Hong Kong5.23Moderate 52 Cameroon5.22Moderate 53 Spain5.21Moderate 54 Ghana5.21Moderate 55 Chile5.15Moderate 56 Norway5.11Moderate 57 United Arab Emirates5.06Moderate 58 Bahrain4.91Moderate 59 Finland4.84Moderate 60 Belize4.83Moderate 61 Albania4.75Moderate 62 North Korea4.73Moderate 63 Hungary4.71Moderate 64 Czech Republic4.67Moderate 65 Madagascar4.66Moderate 66 Iceland4.65Moderate 67 Qatar4.63Moderate 68 Slovakia4.57Moderate 69 Bhutan4.55Moderate 70 Israel4.46Moderate 71 Denmark4.42Moderate 72 Montenegro4.39Moderate 73 Latvia4.34Moderate 74 Barbados4.21Moderate 75 Dominican Republic4.18Moderate 76 Kazakhstan4.14Moderate 77 Bulgaria4.05Moderate 78 India4.03Moderate 79 Cape Verde4.02Moderate 80 Kuwait3.94Moderate 81 Italy3.88Moderate 82 Nepal3.85Moderate 83 Brazil3.83Moderate 84 Aruba3.75Moderate 85 Sierra Leone3.71Moderate 86 Ireland3.68Moderate 87 Oman3.68Moderate 88 Brunei3.68Moderate 89 Botswana3.51Moderate 90 Gabon3.36Moderate 91 French Guiana3.28Moderate 92 Ukraine3.28Moderate 93 Vanuatu3.26Moderate 94 Sao Tome and Principe3.20Moderate 95 South Africa3.08Moderate 96 New Caledonia3.08Moderate 97 Nicaragua3.07Moderate 98 Liberia3.01Moderate 99 Portugal3.00Moderate 100 Belarus2.99Moderate 101 Channel Islands2.96Moderate 102 Kenya2.96Moderate 103 St. Vincent and the Grenadines2.87Moderate 104 Colombia2.86Moderate 105 Indonesia2.72Moderate 106 Guinea2.71Moderate 107 Reunion2.68Moderate 108 Zimbabwe2.66Moderate 109 Grenada2.66Moderate 110 El Salvador2.65Moderate 111 Malawi2.61Moderate 112 Costa Rica2.54Moderate 113 Uganda2.53Moderate 114 Venezuela2.49Moderate 115 Georgia2.47Moderate 116 Malta2.46Moderate 117 Equatorial Guinea2.44Moderate 118 Argentina2.44Moderate 119 Ecuador2.43Moderate 120 Honduras2.42Moderate 121 Haiti2.38Moderate 122 Myanmar2.36Moderate 123 Puerto Rico2.33Moderate 124 Bolivia2.33Moderate 125 Greece2.27Moderate 126 China2.26Moderate 127 Mexico2.26Moderate 128 Namibia2.05Moderate 129 Curacao2.04Moderate 130 Central African Republic2.02Moderate 131 Croatia1.98Low 132 Panama1.92Low 133 Bangladesh1.92Low 134 Poland1.88Low 135 Philippines1.85Low 136 Serbia1.85Low 137 Kyrgyzstan1.81Low 138 St. Lucia1.80Low 139 Guatemala1.76Low 140 Republic of the Congo1.71Low 141 Lithuania1.70Low 142 Saudi Arabia1.61Low 143 Angola1.52Low 144 Eswatini1.48Low 145 French Polynesia1.45Low 146 Paraguay1.43Low 147 Seychelles1.36Low 148 Guam1.34Low 149 Maldives1.33Low 150 Mali1.31Low 151 Syria1.30Low 152 Kosovo1.26Low 153 Turkmenistan1.26Low 154 Thailand1.25Low 155 U.S. Virgin Islands1.23Low 156 Peru1.22Low 157 Azerbaijan1.17Low 158 Burundi1.13Low 159 Solomon Islands1.11Low 160 Egypt1.07Low 161 Uzbekistan0.99Very low 162 Guadeloupe0.94Very low 163 Martinique0.90Very low 164 Democratic Republic of the Congo0.85Very low 165 Pakistan0.79Very low 166 Gambia0.68Very low 167 Rwanda0.68Very low 168 Cambodia0.66Very low 169 Jordan0.66Very low 170 Turkey0.66Very low 171 Armenia0.62Very low 172 Lesotho0.61Very low 173 Senegal0.56Very low 174 Kiribati0.55Very low 175 Bahamas0.55Very low 176 Samoa0.54Very low 177 Djibouti0.53Very low 178 Tonga0.51Very low 179 Niger0.43Very low 180 Zambia0.40Very low 181 Comoros0.39Very low 182 Algeria0.37Very low 183 Romania0.34Very low 184 Federated States of Micronesia0.28Very low 185 Mayotte0.27Very low 186 Sudan0.26Very low 187 Tajikistan0.25Very low 188 Palestinian territories0.24Very low 189 Libya0.23Very low 190 Papua New Guinea0.21Very low 191 Mauritania0.19Very low 192 Tunisia0.16Very low 193 Iraq0.12Very low 194 Moldova0.11Very low 195 Timor-Leste0.11Very low 196 Western Sahara0.10Very low 197 Morocco0.08Very low 198 Iran0.05Very low 199 Somalia0.04Very low 200 Afghanistan0.03Very low 201 Yemen0.03Very low Singapore leads the ranking with a score of 9.25, while several countries at the bottom have near-zero diversity, underscoring how wide the global gap is. Where Religious Diversity Is Highest Singapore stands apart globally, with no single religion accounting for more than a third of its population. This balance across Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and unaffiliated groups gives it the highest diversity score in the dataset, well ahead of most countries. Other highly diverse countries include Suriname and Taiwan, where multiple religions coexist relatively evenly. These countries often share histories shaped by migration, trade, or colonial influence, which help sustain a more diverse mix of religious identities. Where Diversity Is Lowest At the other end of the spectrum, several countries in the Middle East and North Africa have diversity scores close to zero. In places like Yemen and Afghanistan, a single religion accounts for nearly the entire population, leaving little variation in religious identity. In addition, relatively low immigration levels mean fewer new religious communities are introduced over time. Countries like Yemen and Afghanistan also tend to have more ethnically and culturally homogeneous populations, which historically align with a single dominant faith. By contrast, highly diverse countries typically combine open migration patterns, legal protections for religious freedom, and urban, trade-driven histories that bring multiple belief systems into close contact. How Diversity Changed Between 2010 and 2020 Globally, religious diversity is rising, but unevenly. Between 2010 and 2020, more countries moved into moderate and high diversity categories, driven largely by migration and shifting religious affiliation. North America saw some of the fastest increases, with both the U.S. and Canada becoming more religiously mixed. The number of countries classified as having “very low” diversity fell from 48 to 41, while those in the “moderate” category rose from 81 to 89. Here are the top 10 countries with the biggest increases in religious diversity from 2010 to 2020: CountryRDI Score 2010RDI Score 2020RDI Score Change Chile2.85.1+2.3 Ireland1.83.7+1.9 Malta0.72.5+1.8 Austria3.95.6+1.7 Oman2.13.7+1.6 Belarus1.43+1.6 United States4.25.8+1.6 Brazil2.33.8+1.5 Ecuador12.4+1.4 Italy2.53.9+1.4 North America experienced the most significant shift, with an average RDI increase of 1.40. Both the U.S. and Canada moved further into the “high” diversity category, driven by immigration and changing religious affiliation patterns. While less pronounced than the increases, a few countries did experience declines in religious diversity. Here are the top 10 decreases: CountryRDI Score 2010RDI Score 2020RDI Score Change Kazakhstan5.14.1-1.0 Syria2.21.3-0.9 Vietnam6.25.6-0.6 Madagascar5.34.7-0.6 Fiji5.85.3-0.5 Ivory Coast7.36.8-0.5 Bahrain5.44.9-0.5 Albania5.34.8-0.5 Mozambique7.16.6-0.5 Zimbabwe3.22.7-0.5 Overall, the data shows a gradual shift toward greater religious mixing worldwide, though the divide between highly diverse and highly uniform countries remains stark. Learn More on the Voronoi App To explore how religions are distributed globally, check out The World’s Three Largest Religions Have a Combined 5 Billion Followers on the Voronoi app.

In Europe, Monarchs Are Far More Popular Than Politicians Key Takeaways Monarchs in Europe have approval ratings nearly 30 points higher than elected leaders. The gap holds in every country analyzed, without exception. Spain shows the widest divide, with almost a 40-point difference. In Europe, monarchs are far more popular than the politicians who govern. Data from Morning Consult, visualized by The European Correspondent, shows that monarchs hold an approval advantage of nearly 30 points over national leaders. The gap appears in every country analyzed. The pattern reveals a clear divide: leaders making policy decisions often face public backlash, while ceremonial figures largely avoid it. Approval Ratings for Elected and Unelected Leaders Below, we break down approval ratings across eight European countries. NamePositionCountryApproval Rating (April 2026) King Charles III Monarch UK53% Keir Starmer National leader UK27% King Willem-Alexander Monarch Netherlands63% Rob Jetten National leader Netherlands28% King Harald V Monarch Norway61% Jonas Gahr Støre National leader Norway31% King Philippe Monarch Belgium66% Bart de Wever National leader Belgium35% King Carl XVI Gustaf Monarch Sweden55% Ulf Kristersson National leader Sweden38% King Felipe VI Monarch Spain76% Pedro Sánchez National leader Spain38% King Frederik X Monarch Denmark80% Mette Frederiksen National leader Denmark43% Grand Duke Henri Monarch Luxembourg69% Luc Frieden National leader Luxembourg49% From the UK to Luxembourg, monarchs outperform politicians across the board. Spain stands out with the largest gap, while even the narrowest differences still favor royalty. Why Do Monarchs Poll Better? One key explanation lies in the fundamentally different roles these figures play. Monarchs are typically nonpartisan, symbolic heads of state, largely removed from day-to-day political decision-making. This helps them avoid the scrutiny and backlash that elected leaders inevitably face. By contrast, national leaders are directly responsible for policy decisions on issues like inflation, immigration, and public services. These decisions often divide public opinion, dragging down approval ratings. Spain and the Netherlands: The Biggest Gaps Spain has the widest popularity divide, with King Felipe VI outpacing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez by nearly 40 points. This reflects broader dissatisfaction with political leadership, alongside relatively stable support for the monarchy. The Netherlands also shows a notable gap, with King Willem-Alexander maintaining a significant lead despite historically low approval ratings for the monarchy itself. This highlights how unpopular political leadership can become by comparison. Even Lower-Rated Monarchs Still Lead Even in countries where monarchs have more modest approval ratings, such as the UK, their standing still surpasses that of elected leaders. This underscores a broader trend: monarchy as an institution retains a degree of public goodwill that politicians struggle to match. As this data shows, in modern Europe, it’s often the figureheads, not the decision-makers, who win the popularity contest.

Published 3 hours ago on May 1, 2026 By Cody Good Graphics & Design Abha Patil Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest Email The following content is sponsored by Global X Canada The Fastest Growing Space Economy Sectors by 2035 Key Takeaways Supply chain and transportation is the fastest-growing sector in the space economy, adding C$445 billion by 2035. Food, defense, and consumer industries are major growth drivers as they adopt space-enabled technologies. The space economy is expanding beyond rockets and satellites. By 2035, it could power industries far beyond orbit, from logistics to agriculture and national defense. In partnership with Global X Canada, this graphic is the first of three in the Investing in Space series. It shows the fastest-growing space sectors by 2035 using data from McKinsey. Which Space Economy Sectors Are Growing Fastest? The global space economy could nearly triple from C$871 billion in 2023 to C$2.5 trillion by 2035. Here is a table that shows which sectors are adding the most value by 2035. Industry2023 ($CAD Billions)2035 ($CAD Billions) Supply chain and transportation121566 Food and beverage supply chain logistics137459 State sponsored defence129345 Retail, consumer goods and lifestyle77234 Media, entertainment and sports197216 State sponsored civil85201 Digital communications2696 Space3092 Other69252 Source: McKinsey. Growth is not evenly distributed across sectors. Instead, industries like supply chain, which rely on satellite data and connectivity, are expanding the most. Supply Chain’s Liftoff Supply chain and transportation lead all sectors, adding C$445 billion in growth by 2035. This surge reflects the increasing importance of real-time tracking via Earth observation and satellite navigation as essential tools for logistics networks. Meanwhile the food and beverage sector follows closely, driven by advances in precision agriculture and monitoring. State-sponsored defense ranks third, highlighting rising demand for surveillance, communications, and security. As a result, defense spending continues to accelerate globally. Investing in Space By 2035, a C$2.5 trillion space economy could evolve into a broad, multi-industry ecosystem where opportunities are emerging across logistics, agriculture, defense, and communications.Investors looking to capture this growth may consider exposure to companies enabling these trends. In particular, solutions focused on satellites, data infrastructure, and space-enabled services are becoming increasingly critical. To learn more, explore the Global X Space Tech Index ETF (ORBX), which targets companies at the forefront of the space economy. Get invested with ORBX, a new frontier for diversification. You may also like Real Estate1 day ago Ranked: Homeownership Rates by U.S. Occupation See how homeownership rates vary by job in the U.S.—and why income alone doesn’t determine who owns homes. Economy1 day ago Mapped: The Top Export in Every U.S. State (2025) From chips in the West to oil in Texas, this map shows what every U.S. state exports—and why it matters for jobs and global trade. Economy2 days ago America Now Spends More on Interest Than Defense When did U.S. net interest costs overtake defense spending? This chart shows the surge in U.S. net interest payments compared to defense spending. Trade2 days ago Ranked: The World’s Largest Importers in 2025 The United States is known as the world’s largest import market. But even far smaller markets carry their own weight as importers. Economy3 days ago Mapped: The States Landing the Most Foreign Investment Nearly $1 trillion in foreign direct investment has flowed into the U.S. since 2020. See which states are attracting the most investment. China4 days ago Ranked: The World’s Biggest Coal Consumers Which countries use the most coal? See the global rankings, led by China at nearly 56% of demand, plus where coal use is still rising. Subscribe Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Join 375,000+ email subscribers: *Sign Up

Published 4 hours ago on May 1, 2026 By Cody Good Graphics & Design Abha Patil Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest Email The following content is sponsored by Hexagon 5 Ways Technology is Making Mining Safer Key Takeaways Mining safety tech uses connected systems rather than standalone tools for real-time operational monitoring. Data-driven insights and automation enable continuous safety improvements, helping prevent incidents before they occur. Mining is one of the most complex and demanding industries in the world. Operations often take place deep underground or in remote regions, where extreme conditions and heavy machinery create a constantly shifting environment. Though mining provides the raw materials for much of modern life and supports the global energy transition, it also carries significant safety risks. As a result, operators are turning to mining safety tech to better manage these challenges and protect workers on site. This graphic, in partnership with Hexagon, shows five ways technology is making mining safer through connected systems. The Evolution of Mining Safety In the past, mine safety relied on reacting to incidents after they occurred. Systems operated in silos, with limited visibility across equipment, people, and site conditions. However, that approach no longer works for today’s fast-moving operations. Many industries are shifting toward connected ecosystems that combine data across multiple inputs. In mining this evolution enables a more proactive safety model. Operators can detect risks earlier, respond faster, and make better data-informed decisions. As a result, this shift lays the foundation for a new generation of mining safety tech designed to work together rather than alone. How Mining Safety Tech Works Each layer of modern mining safety plays a specific role, from monitoring worker proximity to analyzing site-wide data in real time. Here is a table that shows the core technologies improving safety across today’s mining operations: TechnologyDescription Personal Alert DevicesWearable proximity alerts create a digital buffer around workers on foot in high-risk zones. Collision Avoidance SystemReal-time detection of vehicles and fixed objects around heavy equipment and light vehicles. Operator Alertness SystemMonitors fatigue and distraction in vehicles, generating in-cab alerts, seat vibrations, and supervisor insights. Vehicle Intervention SystemAutomatically slows or stops trucks if operators fail to act when imminent collisions are detected. Smart CentreAnalysis of field data for actionable insights to improve site safety. Source: Hexagon. Together, these systems create a continuous loop of awareness, alerting, and intervention. Data flows between devices, vehicles, and control centres to provide a clearer picture of on-site conditions. A Closer Look: Collision Avoidance Systems One of the most critical safety layers is collision avoidance. These systems use real-time positioning and detection to identify nearby vehicles, equipment, and fixed objects. As a result, operators receive immediate alerts when hazards enter their vicinity. This added visibility helps reduce blind spots and gives workers more time to react in high-risk environments. How It All Comes Together: The Safety Centre The full impact of mining safety tech emerges when these systems connect through a centralized safety centre. By aggregating data from vehicles, wearable devices, and site infrastructure, the safety centre provides a holistic view of operations. This visibility allows teams to identify patterns, anticipate risks, and coordinate responses more effectively. In mining, real-time operational data and centralized insights are becoming essential. Solutions like those from Hexagon are designed to connect these layers, helping operations become safer, smarter, and more productive. See how Hexagon can help protect your people today. You may also like Mining1 week ago These Countries Hold Most of the World’s Copper Global copper reserves approach 980 million tonnes, led by Chile. Central Banks1 week ago Ranked: Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026 Central banks gold buying in 2026 shows rising demand from emerging markets amid geopolitical uncertainty. Mining2 months ago Ranked: U.S. Import Reliance for 37 Critical Minerals This chart shows U.S. import reliance on critical minerals in 2025, with China dominating key supplies. Technology2 months ago Visualizing the Critical Minerals Powering the AI Boom This chart breaks down the critical minerals used in AI data centers, and how reliant the U.S. is on imports for each. Strategic Metals3 months ago Ranked: The Critical Minerals Lost to U.S. Mining Waste, by Tonnage The U.S. discards massive quantities of critical minerals each year through mining waste. Money3 months ago Ranked: The Countries Buying (and Selling) the Most Gold Since 2020 China, Poland, and Türkiye led global gold buying among central banks. Subscribe Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Join 375,000+ email subscribers: *Sign Up

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Coal Still Powers More Electricity Than Any Other Source 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 Fossil fuels still generate 57% of global electricity, despite rapid renewable growth. Coal alone produces about 33% of global power, making it the largest source. Solar and wind are now nearly tied, each contributing about 8–9% of global generation. Coal remains the world’s largest source of electricity, producing roughly one-third of global power in 2025. Despite rapid growth in solar and wind, fossil fuels continue to anchor the global energy system. This visualization breaks down how 31,779 terawatt-hours of electricity were generated worldwide, highlighting the balance between legacy energy systems and fast-growing clean technologies. Data comes from Ember. Fossil Fuels Still Lead the Mix Fossil fuels remain the backbone of global electricity, generating 57% of total output in 2025. Coal alone accounts for nearly one-third of all power produced worldwide, making it the single largest source by a wide margin—larger than any individual clean energy category. Despite years of climate commitments, many economies still rely heavily on coal and gas to meet baseload demand. This reflects both infrastructure lock-in and the challenges of scaling alternative energy sources quickly enough. RankElectricity SourceShare (%) 1Coal32.97 2Gas21.77 3Hydro14.00 4Nuclear8.85 5Solar8.70 6Wind8.50 --Other Fossil2.65 --Other Renewables2.50 Renewables Are Gaining Ground Clean energy sources collectively generated 43% of global electricity, driven by strong growth in solar and wind. Solar accounted for 8.7% of generation, narrowly surpassing wind at 8.5%, marking a significant milestone for solar’s rapid rise. Hydropower remained the largest renewable source at 14%, though its growth has slowed in many regions due to geographic and environmental constraints. Other renewables, including biomass and geothermal, contributed a smaller but steady share. At current growth rates, solar and wind are on track to overtake coal in the coming decades—marking a potential tipping point in the global energy mix. The Role of Nuclear and Transition Challenges Nuclear energy continues to play a stabilizing role in the energy mix, supplying nearly 9% of global electricity. Unlike solar and wind, nuclear provides consistent baseload power, making it a key complement as grids integrate more intermittent renewable sources. Learn More on the Voronoi App If you enjoyed today’s post, check out For Every $1 Spent on Fossil Fuels, World Spends $1.83 on Clean Energy on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Every Country’s Fertility Rate as Births Decline Worldwide 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 71% of the global population lives in countries below replacement fertility (2.1 births per woman). Major economies like China (1.02), the U.S. (1.62), and Brazil (1.60) are all below this threshold. Sub-Saharan Africa stands out, with fertility rates often above 4.0 and driving future growth. Most of the world is no longer having enough children to sustain its population. This map shows fertility rates for every country using data from the United Nations World Population Prospects 2024 Revision. It highlights a widening global divide: while birth rates have fallen across much of Asia, Europe, and the Americas, many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa continue to see far higher fertility. As a result, future population growth is becoming increasingly concentrated in a smaller number of regions, with major implications for economies and labor markets. A World Below Replacement Today, roughly 71% of the global population lives in countries with fertility rates below replacement level. This marks a major demographic shift, as many of the world’s largest economies transition from population growth to long-term decline. Major population centers like China (1.02), the United States (1.62), and Brazil (1.60) all fall into this category. RankCountryPopulationFertility Rate 1 Chad21.0M5.94 2 Somalia19.6M5.91 3 DR Congo112.8M5.90 4 Central African Republic5.5M5.81 5 Niger27.9M5.79 6 Mali25.2M5.42 7 Angola39.0M4.95 8 Burundi14.4M4.68 9 Afghanistan43.8M4.66 10 Mozambique35.6M4.62 11 Mauritania5.3M4.56 12 Mayotte340K4.50 13 Tanzania70.5M4.47 14 Benin14.8M4.42 15 Yemen41.8M4.41 16 Nigeria237.5M4.30 17 Sudan51.7M4.19 18 Cameroon29.9M4.19 19 Ivory Coast32.7M4.17 20 Togo9.7M4.07 21 Uganda51.4M4.06 22 Congo6.5M4.05 23 Guinea15.1M4.04 24 Equatorial Guinea1.9M4.04 25 Burkina Faso24.1M4.00 26 Zambia21.9M3.97 27 Madagascar32.7M3.84 28 Ethiopia135.5M3.81 29 Gambia2.8M3.80 30 Liberia5.7M3.79 31 Comoros880K3.76 32 Samoa220K3.75 33 Senegal18.9M3.71 34 South Sudan12.2M3.71 35 Guinea-Bissau2.2M3.68 36 Zimbabwe16.9M3.62 37 Eritrea3.6M3.61 38 Sierra Leone8.8M3.61 39 Rwanda14.6M3.59 40 Gabon2.6M3.54 41 Vanuatu340K3.53 42 Malawi22.2M3.53 43 Sao Tome and Principe240K3.53 44 Pakistan255.2M3.50 45 Solomon Islands840K3.47 46 Uzbekistan37.0M3.45 47 Ghana35.1M3.30 48 French Guiana310K3.29 49 Nauru10K3.25 50 Palestine5.6M3.19 51 Iraq47.0M3.17 52 Namibia3.1M3.17 53 Tuvalu10K3.14 54 Kenya57.5M3.12 55 Kiribati140K3.09 56 Tonga100K3.07 57 Papua New Guinea10.8M3.03 58 Tajikistan10.8M2.99 59 Kazakhstan20.8M2.95 60 Marshall Islands40K2.82 61 Israel9.5M2.75 62 Kyrgyzstan7.3M2.75 63 Guam170K2.71 64 Egypt118.4M2.71 65 Micronesia110K2.71 66 Eswatini1.3M2.68 67 Algeria47.4M2.67 68 Botswana2.6M2.66 69 Syria25.6M2.66 70 Lesotho2.4M2.64 71 Saint Martin (French part)20K2.63 72 Turkmenistan7.6M2.63 73 Haiti11.9M2.59 74 Mongolia3.5M2.58 75 Djibouti1.2M2.58 76 Jordan11.5M2.57 77 Tokelau0.0K2.57 78 Timor-Leste1.4M2.56 79 Cambodia17.9M2.51 80 Bolivia12.6M2.50 81 Oman5.5M2.48 82 Niue0.0K2.46 83 Honduras11.0M2.45 84 Paraguay7.0M2.39 85 Guyana840K2.37 86 Laos7.9M2.36 87 Saudi Arabia34.6M2.29 88 Northern Mariana Islands40K2.28 89 Guatemala18.7M2.26 90 Libya7.5M2.25 91 Fiji930K2.25 92 American Samoa50K2.25 93 Suriname640K2.21 94 Lebanon5.8M2.21 95 Faroe Islands60K2.20 96 Dominican Republic11.5M2.19 97 South Africa64.8M2.19 98 Morocco38.4M2.18 99 Nicaragua7.0M2.18 100 Western Sahara600K2.15 101 Réunion880K2.13 102 Bangladesh175.7M2.11 103 Indonesia285.7M2.10 104 Monaco40K2.09 105 Panama4.6M2.09 106 Seychelles130K2.08 107 Myanmar54.9M2.08 108 United States Virgin Islands80K2.07 109 Venezuela28.5M2.06 110 Guadeloupe370K2.05 111 Belize420K2.01 112 Cook Islands10K2.00 113 Martinique340K1.97 114 New Caledonia300K1.95 115 India1.46B1.94 116 Peru34.6M1.94 117 Sri Lanka23.2M1.94 118 Nepal29.6M1.94 119 Greenland60K1.91 120 Gibraltar40K1.88 121 Vietnam101.6M1.88 122 Philippines116.8M1.88 123 Mexico131.9M1.87 124 Palau20K1.86 125 Tunisia12.3M1.80 126 Montenegro630K1.80 127 Ecuador18.3M1.79 128 Georgia3.8M1.79 129 Bahrain1.6M1.78 130 Dem. People's Republic of Korea26.6M1.77 131 El Salvador6.4M1.75 132 St. Vincent & Grenadines100K1.75 133 Bulgaria6.7M1.74 134 Moldova3.0M1.72 135 Armenia3.0M1.71 136 Brunei470K1.71 137 Romania18.9M1.71 138 Barbados280K1.70 139 Qatar3.1M1.70 140 Falkland Islands0.0K1.69 141 Iran92.4M1.67 142 Azerbaijan10.4M1.66 143 New Zealand5.2M1.65 144 St. Helena10K1.64 145 Australia27.0M1.64 146 France66.7M1.64 147 United States347.3M1.62 148 Turkey87.7M1.62 149 Colombia53.4M1.62 150 Aruba110K1.61 151 Brazil212.8M1.60 152 Ireland5.3M1.60 153 Slovenia2.1M1.58 154 Antigua and Barbuda90K1.58 155 Slovakia5.5M1.57 156 Maldives530K1.55 157 Liechtenstein40K1.54 158 United Kingdom69.5M1.54 159 Isle of Man80K1.53 160 Malaysia36.0M1.53 161 Kosovo1.7M1.53 162 Trinidad and Tobago1.5M1.52 163 Denmark6.0M1.52 164 Portugal10.4M1.52 165 Cayman Islands80K1.51 166 St. Kitts & Nevis50K1.51 167 Argentina45.9M1.50 168 Serbia6.7M1.50 169 Iceland400K1.50 170 Bosnia and Herzegovina3.1M1.50 171 Kuwait5.0M1.50 172 Cape Verde530K1.50 173 Hungary9.6M1.50 174 French Polynesia280K1.48 175 Croatia3.9M1.47 176 Dominica70K1.47 177 North Macedonia1.8M1.47 178 Czechia10.6M1.47 179 Russia144.0M1.46 180 Grenada120K1.46 181 Germany84.1M1.46 182 Cuba10.9M1.45 183 Bonaire30K1.45 184 Montserrat0.0K1.45 185 Switzerland9.0M1.44 186 Turks and Caicos Islands50K1.44 187 Netherlands18.4M1.44 188 Sweden10.7M1.44 189 Bhutan800K1.44 190 Sint Maarten40K1.43 191 Norway5.6M1.42 192 Bermuda60K1.41 193 Luxembourg680K1.40 194 Wallis & Futuna10K1.40 195 Belgium11.8M1.39 196 Uruguay3.4M1.39 197 Jersey100K1.38 198 St. Lucia180K1.38 199 Estonia1.3M1.37 200 Guernsey60K1.37 201 Cyprus1.4M1.37 202 Bahamas400K1.36 203 Anguilla10K1.35 204 Latvia1.9M1.35 205 Greece9.9M1.34 206 Jamaica2.8M1.34 207 Canada40.1M1.33 208 Albania2.8M1.33 209 Austria9.1M1.33 210 Costa Rica5.2M1.31 211 Poland38.1M1.31 212 Finland5.6M1.30 213 Saint Pierre and Miquelon10K1.28 214 Spain47.9M1.23 215 Japan123.1M1.23 216 Belarus9.0M1.22 217 Lithuania2.8M1.22 218 Italy59.1M1.21 219 Mauritius1.3M1.21 220 United Arab Emirates11.3M1.21 221 Thailand71.6M1.19 222 San Marino30K1.16 223 Chile19.9M1.13 224 Malta550K1.11 225 Andorra80K1.10 226 Curacao190K1.07 227 British Virgin Islands40K1.06 228 China1.42B1.02 229 Ukraine39.0M1.00 230 Singapore5.9M0.96 231 Puerto Rico3.2M0.94 232 Taiwan23.1M0.86 233 St. Barthélemy10K0.83 234 South Korea51.7M0.75 235 Hong Kong7.4M0.74 236 Macao720K0.69 China’s Historic Decline With a fertility rate of just 1.02, China is now among the lowest in the world. This sharp decline is largely a legacy of the country’s one-child policy, which was in place from 1980 to 2015. Despite policy reversals and financial incentives, fertility has remained depressed. Notably, no country that has fallen to such low levels has successfully returned to replacement rates. Africa Drives Future Growth While most countries are experiencing declining birth rates, much of Sub-Saharan Africa remains on a very different trajectory. Fertility rates above 4.0 are still common, supporting rapid population growth across the region. Learn More on the Voronoi App If you enjoyed today’s post, check out When Will the Global Population Reach Its Peak? on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Mapped: Europe’s Birth Rate Collapse 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 No country in Europe meets the 2.1 birth rate needed to sustain population levels. Ukraine (0.99), Spain (1.1), and Poland (1.14) rank among the lowest. Even Europe’s highest rates, such as France (1.61), remain well below replacement. Europe’s population is no longer replacing itself. Across the continent, fertility rates have fallen below the 2.1 births per woman needed to maintain stable population levels, with no country meeting that threshold as of 2024. This map shows the number of live births per woman across Europe using the most recent data from Eurostat, FRED, and the UK’s Office for National Statistics. From Ukraine (0.99) to Spain (1.1), some of Europe’s largest countries now rank among those with the lowest birth rates, highlighting how widespread the decline has become. Fertility Crisis in South and Eastern Europe Europe’s lowest birth rates are concentrated in the east and south, where economic strain and geopolitical instability have accelerated long-term declines. Ukraine has seen the sharpest drop. Its fertility rate, which last exceeded the replacement level in 1986, fell to 0.9 in 2022 before recovering slightly to 0.99 in 2024. Among countries at peace, Malta has one of the lowest fertility rates at 1.01, followed by Spain (1.1) and Poland (1.14). This data table lists European countries alongside their fertility rates as of 2024. RankCountryFertility Rate (2024) 1 Montenegro1.75 2 Bulgaria1.72 3 Albania1.64 4 Serbia1.64 5 France1.61 6 Iceland1.56 7 Slovenia1.52 8 Denmark1.47 9 Ireland1.47 10 Croatia1.46 11 Slovakia1.46 12 Norway1.45 13 Belgium1.44 14 North Macedonia1.44 15 Netherlands1.43 16 Sweden1.43 17 Hungary1.41 18 Portugal1.41 19 UK1.41 20 Romania1.39 21 Cyprus1.38 22 Czechia1.36 23 Germany1.36 24 Austria1.31 25 Switzerland1.29 26 Luxembourg1.25 27 Finland1.25 28 Greece1.24 29 Latvia1.24 30 Estonia1.18 31 Italy1.18 32 Poland1.14 33 Lithuania1.11 34 Spain1.10 35 Malta1.01 36 Ukraine0.99 --Replacement Rate2.1 Lower fertility in countries like Spain and Poland reflects a mix of economic pressures, including lower wages and the rising cost of raising children, alongside broader trends seen across developed economies. Aging populations are already reshaping national priorities. As Poland seeks to build a larger military, its shrinking population presents a strategic vulnerability. Europe’s Fertility Woes This trend extends across the continent. Europe’s largest economies, including Germany (1.36), the UK (1.41), France (1.61), and Italy (1.18), all remain well below replacement levels. Even countries with relatively higher fertility rates, such as Bulgaria (1.72) and Montenegro (1.75), are not producing enough births to stabilize their populations. One response has been increased immigration. In Germany, migration policy in the mid-2010s was shaped partly by the need to support the country’s labor system. However, this approach has also fueled political backlash and the rise of anti-immigration parties. Family Incentives As A Solution? Some countries are attempting to boost birth rates through financial incentives. France, Hungary, and Poland have introduced tax credits, subsidies, and other programs aimed at encouraging larger families. Hungary, for example, has spent over a decade expanding benefits for young couples, with the goal of reaching the 2.1 replacement rate by 2030. So far, the results have been limited. Hungary’s fertility rate of 1.41 is similar to countries like the UK and Portugal, suggesting that financial incentives alone may not reverse the broader trend. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about this topic, check out the Which European Nations Have the Best Fertility Treatment Policies? on Voronoi.

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Ranked: Homeownership Rates Across Major U.S. Occupations 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 High-paying jobs don’t always translate into higher homeownership. Several mid-income professions match or exceed ownership levels of top earners. After a certain income level, homeownership rates converge across occupations. Does earning more money actually make it easier to own a home? Across U.S. occupations, the answer isn’t as straightforward as it seems. While high-income roles like management and STEM lead in pay, their homeownership rates are often matched by mid-income professions such as education and social services. Using data from the National Association of Realtors and the U.S. Census Bureau, this graphic ranks homeownership rates by occupation in 2024, revealing how factors beyond salary—like job stability and geographic distribution—shape who owns a home. A clear pattern emerges: once incomes pass a moderate threshold, homeownership rates begin to level out across very different occupations. Which Jobs Have High Homeownership Rates? Management and business roles stand at 72%, reflecting both higher incomes and stability. But just below them, a surprising group of professions clusters tightly together. STEM professionals and education workers have nearly identical homeownership rates (both 67%)—despite a massive gap in pay. In fact, STEM workers earn over $100K on average, while education workers make roughly $65K. Here’s how homeownership varies across major occupations: OccupationHomeownership Rate 2024Median Salary Management & Business72.2%$91,398 Education & Social Services67.3%$65,147 STEM / Technical67.2%$102,450 Sales & Real Estate63.3%$50,967 Healthcare62.2%$82,134 Skilled Trades & Construction62.0%$54,777 Transportation & Public Safety58.1%$46,975 Service Occupations45.5%$38,936 Why do lower-paid professions keep pace? Occupations like education, healthcare, and public services often offer more stable employment, predictable income, and access to benefits—factors that can make long-term financial planning, including homeownership, more achievable. Healthcare and skilled trades (both 62%) show relatively strong ownership, reinforcing the role of stable, in-demand work. Sales and real estate workers (63%) also sit in this middle band, reinforcing how a wide range of incomes converge at similar ownership levels. At the lower end, transportation and public safety workers (58%) and service occupations (46%) lag behind, highlighting barriers faced by lower-income and less stable roles in accessing housing. The biggest takeaway: beyond a certain income level, what you earn matters less than how stable and predictable that income is. That helps explain why professions with very different salaries end up with nearly identical homeownership rates. Learn More on the Voronoi App For more, explore this graphic on the average salaries by state in 2025.

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Mapped: The Top Export in Every U.S. State (2025) 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 Aircraft is the top export in 13 states—the most of any category. Tech leads the West, while energy dominates much of the South. Pharmaceuticals are the top export in six states, concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest. America’s $2.1 trillion export economy isn’t powered by a single industry—it’s a patchwork of 50 specialized engines. This map shows the top international goods export for every U.S. state, based on data from the U.S. International Trade Administration. From aircraft in Washington to oil and gas in Texas, each state specializes in a different piece of the global economy. Notably, over half of U.S. states are tied to strategic sectors like aerospace, semiconductors, and energy—industries increasingly shaped by geopolitical tensions and supply chain shifts. The Industries Driving U.S. Exports by State Aircraft is the most widespread top export, leading in 13 states across the country. Aerospace and defense is the only U.S. manufacturing sector with a net trade surplus, fueling almost $1 trillion in economic activity annually. In states like Washington and Florida, it ranks as the largest export category overall. Below is a state-by-state breakdown of the top export category in 2025, based on NAICS-4 classifications: StateTop Export 2025Category ArkansasAircraftTransportation ConnecticutAircraftTransportation FloridaAircraftTransportation GeorgiaAircraftTransportation HawaiiAircraftTransportation KansasAircraftTransportation KentuckyAircraftTransportation MaineAircraftTransportation MarylandAircraftTransportation New HampshireAircraftTransportation OhioAircraftTransportation OklahomaAircraftTransportation WashingtonAircraftTransportation DelawareMedicineMedical IllinoisMedicineMedical IndianaMedicineMedical MassachusettsMedicineMedical North CarolinaMedicineMedical PennsylvaniaMedicineMedical Rhode IslandMedicineMedical AlabamaVehiclesTransportation MichiganVehiclesTransportation MissouriVehiclesTransportation South CarolinaVehiclesTransportation West VirginiaVehiclesTransportation NevadaPrimary MetalsIndustrial New JerseyPrimary MetalsIndustrial New YorkPrimary MetalsIndustrial UtahPrimary MetalsIndustrial IdahoSemiconductorsTech New MexicoSemiconductorsTech OregonSemiconductorsTech VermontSemiconductorsTech ArizonaIT HardwareTech CaliforniaIT HardwareTech WisconsinIT HardwareTech MississippiRefiningEnergy North DakotaRefiningEnergy VirginiaRefiningEnergy South DakotaChemicalsIndustrial WyomingChemicalsIndustrial LouisianaOil & GasEnergy TexasOil & GasEnergy ColoradoMeatpackingAgriculture NebraskaMeatpackingAgriculture MinnesotaMedical DevicesMedical TennesseeMedical DevicesMedical MontanaCattleAgriculture AlaskaFishingAgriculture IowaMachineryIndustrial Semiconductors and Tech Anchor the West Semiconductors dominate exports across parts of the West, including New Mexico and Oregon—highlighting the growing importance of domestic chip manufacturing. Semiconductors made up 46% of New Mexico’s exports, totaling $7 billion in 2025. In Oregon, they were valued at more than $9 billion. In California and Arizona, IT hardware and computer equipment are leading exports, reinforcing the region’s central role in global tech supply chains. These states are increasingly critical to U.S. efforts to reduce reliance on foreign chip production, especially amid rising competition with China. Biotech and Pharmaceuticals Power the Northeast and Midwest Pharmaceuticals are the top export in six states, driven by dense R&D ecosystems in the Northeast and Midwest. Massachusetts alone hosts more than 1,000 life sciences companies, making it a global hub for drug development and production. Indiana, meanwhile, is home to Eli Lilly’s global headquarters, with over 13,000 employees in Indianapolis alone. This concentration of talent, capital, and research institutions continues to fuel high-value medical exports across the region. America’s Energy Export Powerhouse in the South The U.S. energy export boom is concentrated in the South, where a tightly integrated network of production, processing, and shipping powers global supply. Texas anchors the system with $137 billion in oil and gas exports, while Louisiana’s ports and natural gas output connect U.S. energy to global markets. Neighboring Mississippi plays a key role in refining, turning raw inputs into export-ready fuels. As global energy markets tighten, this regional dominance is becoming more important. In April, U.S. crude and petroleum exports surged to a record 12.9 million barrels per day, driven by conflict in the Middle East. Why This Matters From aerospace hubs to semiconductor corridors and energy strongholds, America’s export economy is deeply regional—and increasingly strategic. As global trade becomes more fragmented and geopolitics reshape supply chains, the industries dominating each state today could play an outsized role in shaping the country’s economic resilience looking ahead. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the share of U.S. exports by state in 2025.

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Mapped: Where Young Adults Use Social Media Most in Europe 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 Social media use among Europe’s young adults is near-universal in many countries, often exceeding 95%. Italy (80.3%) and Germany (84.2%) have the lowest rates on the continent. Northern Europe and the Balkans lead, with several countries approaching full adoption. Social media use among young adults (aged 16–29) in Europe is nearing saturation, with many countries approaching universal adoption. But two of Europe’s largest economies stand apart. Data from Eurostat and Ofcom shows a clear gap. While countries in Northern Europe and the Balkans lead, major economies like Germany (84.2%) and Italy (80.3%) lag behind their peers. Nearly Universal Adoption With Two Exceptions In countries like Denmark or Czechia, social media use is close to universal among young adults. Germany and Italy break from this pattern, highlighting how cultural and structural factors continue to shape digital behavior. Below is the full ranking of 34 European countries by social media use among young adults: RankCountryUse of Social Networks in 2025 among young adults 1 Cyprus98.3 2 North Macedonia97.7 3 Czechia97.2 4 Serbia97.2 5 UK97.0 6 Denmark96.9 7 Finland96.6 8 Austria96.1 9 Montenegro96.1 10 Switzerland95.8 11 Norway95.7 12 Ireland94.4 13 Netherlands94.2 14 France93.9 15 Latvia93.8 16 Turkey93.4 17 Romania92.1 18 Malta91.9 19 Spain91.6 20 Portugal91.6 21 Estonia91.4 22 Hungary91.1 23 Slovenia91.0 24 Croatia90.7 25 Greece90.6 26 Poland90.5 27 Lithuania89.8 28 Bulgaria89.4 29 Slovakia88.7 30 Sweden88.4 31 Belgium88.3 32 Luxembourg84.8 33 Germany84.2 34 Italy80.3 --Average92.4 Cyprus and North Macedonia have the highest rates of young-adult social media use in Europe, followed closely by Czechia, Denmark, Finland, Serbia, and the United Kingdom. In these countries, social media functions as essential infrastructure, used for everything from coordinating study groups to maintaining social circles. Being offline can make young people effectively invisible in networks that increasingly operate online. Germany and Italy: The Exceptions While social media use exceeds 90% across much of Europe, Germany and Italy stand apart. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, has 84.2% of young adults on social media, well below many of its neighbors. Italy is lower still at 80.3%, meaning one in five young adults are not on any social platform, the highest share on the continent. In Germany, stricter privacy norms shaped by GDPR have contributed to a more cautious approach to online presence. Policymakers are even considering restrictions on youth access, with leaders citing the dangers of online socialization. In Italy, lower usage may reflect a stronger role for offline social life. Everyday interactions, from evening strolls to time spent in cafes, continue to provide alternatives to digital connection. Migration’s Relationship With Social Media High social media use in the Balkans is partly linked to emigration. Roughly a quarter of Western Balkan citizens, for example, move abroad in search of higher wages and better job opportunities. For families split across different countries or even different continents, social media plays a key role in maintaining communication. Diaspora has helped social media usage overcome the digital skepticism seen in countries like Germany or Italy. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about this topic, check out the We’re Spending More Time Watching Videos on Social Media on Voronoi.

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app. America Now Spends More on Interest Than Defense 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 U.S. interest payments surpassed defense spending in 2024 for the first time in nearly a century. The gap is projected to widen significantly, with interest costs reaching $2.1 trillion by 2036—almost double defense spending. Rising debt and higher rates are making interest the fastest-growing part of the federal budget. For the first time since the late 1920s, the U.S. is spending more on interest payments than on national defense. That shift marks a turning point in federal priorities. As debt levels climb and borrowing costs rise, interest payments are taking up a growing share of the budget—projected to hit $2.1 trillion by 2036, far outpacing defense spending. This chart compares annual U.S. net interest payments and defense outlays from 1996 to 2036, based on data from the White House and projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) as of February 2026. U.S. Interest vs. Defense Spending (1996–2036P) In 2024, U.S. interest payments reached $879.9 billion, surpassing defense spending of $850.7 billion. Projections through 2036 show interest payments continuing to pull ahead, even as defense spending rises. The table below shows how annual U.S. net interest payments and defense spending changed from 1996 to 2025, along with projections from 2026 to 2036: YearU.S. Annual Net Interest Payments (billions)U.S. Annual Defense Spending (billions) 1996$241.1$266.0 1997$244.0$271.7 1998$241.1$270.2 1999$229.8$275.5 2000$222.9$295.0 2001$206.2$306.1 2002$170.9$349.0 2003$153.1$404.9 2004$160.2$454.1 2005$184.0$493.6 2006$226.6$520.0 2007$237.1$547.9 2008$252.8$612.4 2009$186.9$656.7 2010$196.2$688.9 2011$230.0$699.4 2012$220.4$670.5 2013$220.9$625.8 2014$229.0$596.4 2015$223.2$583.4 2016$240.0$584.8 2017$262.6$590.2 2018$325.0$622.7 2019$375.2$676.4 2020$345.5$713.8 2021$352.3$741.6 2022$475.9$752.1 2023$658.3$806.2 2024$879.9$850.7 2025$970.0$893.0 2026P$1,039.0$885.0 2027P$1,108.0$901.0 2028P$1,218.0$928.0 2029P$1,324.0$938.0 2030P$1,432.0$966.0 2031P$1,548.0$986.0 2032P$1,670.0$1,006.0 2033P$1,784.0$1,034.0 2034P$1,904.0$1,051.0 2035P$2,019.0$1,068.0 2036P$2,144.0$1,100.0 How Interest Overtook Defense Spending Between 1996 and 2001, U.S. defense spending averaged about 30% higher than net interest costs, as falling interest rates and budget surpluses kept debt servicing relatively low. That gap widened sharply after 9/11. Military spending doubled over the following decade, reaching $699 billion in 2011, while interest costs rose more slowly to $230 billion. During the low-interest-rate era of the 2010s, borrowing costs stayed low even as federal debt nearly doubled—from $9.0 trillion in 2010 to $16.8 trillion in 2019—masking the long-term cost of that debt. After COVID-19, that dynamic reversed. A surge in borrowing combined with higher interest rates pushed debt servicing costs sharply higher, with net interest outlays nearly tripling to $970 billion by 2025. At a projected $1.0 trillion in 2026, America’s net interest bill is set to become the fastest-growing major budget item. By 2036, net interest outlays will more than double to $2.1 trillion, while defense spending is projected to reach $1.1 trillion. If current projections hold, the U.S. will spend far more on servicing its debt than on national defense within a decade, raising questions about how future budgets will balance economic stability, security, and growth. Why This Shift Matters This crossover isn’t just symbolic. It marks a fundamental shift in how the U.S. allocates its resources—toward servicing past borrowing rather than funding current priorities. As interest costs rise, a growing share of federal spending is effectively locked in, reducing flexibility for areas like defense, infrastructure, and research. Over time, this can crowd out new investments and make it harder for policymakers to respond to economic downturns or emerging challenges. In other words, higher interest payments don’t just reflect rising debt—they actively shape what the government can afford to do next. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about which NATO countries dominate defense spending, check out this graphic, which visualizes NATO countries by their estimated defense spending.

Published 3 hours ago on April 29, 2026 By Cody Good Graphics & Design Athul Alexander Abha Patil Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest Email The following content is sponsored by BullionVault 3 Costs Impacting Gold Returns Key Takeaways Price premiums, including spreads and trading fees, directly impact how much value investors retain when buying and selling gold. Where gold investments are stored plays a critical role in shaping the cost, security, and overall value.Ongoing management fees, particularly in financial products, can reduce returns over time, giving physical gold a potential cost advantage as investments grow. Commodity price spikes historically capture mass attention, but few have drawn as many eyes as gold. The metal has been on a record-setting bull run, making it a persistent topic of interest since at least 2023. The historic, multi-year price rally raises an important consideration: how investors choose to access gold can significantly impact their returns. There are several different paths to gold investment, each with its own costs and benefits that shape overall performance. This graphic, in partnership with BullionVault, shows the key cost factors that impact gold returns. How to Invest in Gold Every gold investment starts as a 400-troy-ounce wholesale bar. From this foundation, investors have three options, each with a distinct cost structure that can affect returns over time. They are: Retail products, like coins and small bars Financial products, such as ETFs Wholesale bullion, often stored in professional vaults Retail and wholesale investments allow for physical ownership of gold with the decision-making power over where and how the gold is held. In contrast, ETFs offer investors shares in a trust to gain easy access and exposure to the price of gold. Across all methods, three key factors shape returns: price premiums, storage and insurance costs, and ongoing management fees. The Hidden Premiums of Gold Investment Every gold investment includes a premium, regardless of the path taken. This premium comes from two factors: the price spread and trading costs. The price spread indicates the percentage gap between gold’s buy and sell price. It captures real-world costs like minting, shipping and delivery, and dealer markups. Trading costs are the commissions and trading platform access fees, as a percentage of trade value. Together, these premiums determine how much value investors retain when entering or exiting a position. Here is a table that shows how spreads and trading fees compare across different gold investment methods, using a baseline $10K investment. FormCost Coins$800 Bars$500 BullionVault$115 ETF$50 Investment Value$10,000 Source: Daily Gold Price; ETF.com; BullionVault. Minimizing these combined costs can help investors retain more capital when seeking gold exposure. Gold Storage and Ownership Trade-offs Where gold is kept directly affects the cost, security, and value of the investment. Storage options include homes with or without a safe, bank deposit boxes, and professional vaults. This table shows what first-year storage costs can look like across methods using a $10K baseline: Storage OptionCost Basic home safe$1,985 Safety deposit box$1,125 BullionVault$48 ETF$32 Investment Value$10,000 Source: London Gold Exchange & BullionVault. While home storage offers full control, it often requires additional spending on a safe and insurance. Bank deposit boxes may limit access and exclude insurance coverage.Meanwhile, ETFs remove storage concerns but also eliminate ownership benefits, while charging expense ratios to cover the operating and management fees of the fund. In contrast, professional vaults can offer lower costs and stronger security through institutional-scale infrastructure. Platforms like BullionVault, provide access to these vaults, passing on lower costs and economies of scale to individual investors. Long-Term Cost Efficiency for Gold Investment Across most metrics, ETFs often appear cheaper at the start, but their cost advantage can change as investments frow. Ongoing fees, though small, can compound and reduce returns over time. The table below compares the weighted average monthly cost of ETF ownership with BullionVault’s monthly costs. Investment ValueBV Storage Fee /MonthUS Weighted Avg ETF (0.32%) 10004.000.27 50004.001.33 100004.002.67 150004.004.00 200004.005.33 250004.006.67 300004.008.00 350004.009.33 400004.0010.67 450004.5012.00 500005.0013.33 550005.5014.67 600006.0016.00 650006.5017.33 700007.0018.67 750007.5020.00 800008.0021.33 850008.5022.67 900009.0024.00 950009.5025.33 10000010.0026.67 Fee as a % of investment value0.01% ($4 minimum)0.32% Source: BullionVault. *Average weighting based on each ETF’s gold holdings. Based on this structure, once an investment exceeds $15K worth of gold, BullionVault can become more cost-efficient than the average U.S. ETF. Ultimately, investors that reduce trading, storage, and management fees can retain more of gold’s value. BullionVault offers an easier way to buy, store and sell physical gold at wholesale prices, with access to five professional-market vaults worldwide. You may also like Gold6 months ago Gold or Stocks? $10K After 25 Years Gold or Stocks? See how $10K since 2000 grew, and why gold leads on wealth preservation. Gold6 months ago Charted: A Decade of Central Bank Gold Purchases Central bank gold buying has reshaped the market over the past decade. This piece charts the trend and spotlights 2025’s leading buyers—and why it matters. Subscribe Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Join 375,000+ email subscribers: *Sign Up

Published 1 day ago on April 29, 2026 By Cody Good Graphics & Design Athul Alexander Abha Patil Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest Email The following content is sponsored by BullionVault 3 Costs Impacting Gold Returns Key Takeaways Price premiums, including spreads and trading fees, directly impact how much value investors retain when buying and selling gold. Where gold investments are stored plays a critical role in shaping the cost, security, and overall value.Ongoing management fees, particularly in financial products, can reduce returns over time, giving physical gold a potential cost advantage as investments grow. Commodity price spikes historically capture mass attention, but few have drawn as many eyes as gold. The metal has been on a record-setting bull run, making it a persistent topic of interest since at least 2023. The historic, multi-year price rally raises an important consideration: how investors choose to access gold can significantly impact their returns. There are several different paths to gold investment, each with its own costs and benefits that shape overall performance. This graphic, in partnership with BullionVault, shows the key cost factors that impact gold returns. How to Invest in Gold Every gold investment starts as a 400-troy-ounce wholesale bar. From this foundation, investors have three options, each with a distinct cost structure that can affect returns over time. They are: Retail products, like coins and small bars Financial products, such as ETFs Wholesale bullion, often stored in professional vaults Retail and wholesale investments allow for physical ownership of gold with the decision-making power over where and how the gold is held. In contrast, ETFs offer investors shares in a trust to gain easy access and exposure to the price of gold. Across all methods, three key factors shape returns: price premiums, storage and insurance costs, and ongoing management fees. The Hidden Premiums of Gold Investment Every gold investment includes a premium, regardless of the path taken. This premium comes from two factors: the price spread and trading costs. The price spread indicates the percentage gap between gold’s buy and sell price. It captures real-world costs like minting, shipping and delivery, and dealer markups. Trading costs are the commissions and trading platform access fees, as a percentage of trade value. Together, these premiums determine how much value investors retain when entering or exiting a position. Here is a table that shows how spreads and trading fees compare across different gold investment methods, using a baseline $10K investment. FormCost Coins$800 Bars$500 BullionVault$115 ETF$50 Investment Value$10,000 Source: Daily Gold Price; ETF.com; BullionVault. Minimizing these combined costs can help investors retain more capital when seeking gold exposure. Gold Storage and Ownership Trade-offs Where gold is kept directly affects the cost, security, and value of the investment. Storage options include homes with or without a safe, bank deposit boxes, and professional vaults. This table shows what first-year storage costs can look like across methods using a $10K baseline: Storage OptionCost Basic home safe$1,985 Safety deposit box$1,125 BullionVault$48 ETF$32 Investment Value$10,000 Source: London Gold Exchange & BullionVault. While home storage offers full control, it often requires additional spending on a safe and insurance. Bank deposit boxes may limit access and exclude insurance coverage.Meanwhile, ETFs remove storage concerns but also eliminate ownership benefits, while charging expense ratios to cover the operating and management fees of the fund. In contrast, professional vaults can offer lower costs and stronger security through institutional-scale infrastructure. Platforms like BullionVault, provide access to these vaults, passing on lower costs and economies of scale to individual investors. Long-Term Cost Efficiency for Gold Investment Across most metrics, ETFs often appear cheaper at the start, but their cost advantage can change as investments frow. Ongoing fees, though small, can compound and reduce returns over time. The table below compares the weighted average monthly cost of ETF ownership with BullionVault’s monthly costs. Investment ValueBV Storage Fee /MonthUS Weighted Avg ETF (0.32%) 10004.000.27 50004.001.33 100004.002.67 150004.004.00 200004.005.33 250004.006.67 300004.008.00 350004.009.33 400004.0010.67 450004.5012.00 500005.0013.33 550005.5014.67 600006.0016.00 650006.5017.33 700007.0018.67 750007.5020.00 800008.0021.33 850008.5022.67 900009.0024.00 950009.5025.33 10000010.0026.67 Fee as a % of investment value0.01% ($4 minimum)0.32% Source: BullionVault. *Average weighting based on each ETF’s gold holdings. Based on this structure, once an investment exceeds $15K worth of gold, BullionVault can become more cost-efficient than the average U.S. ETF. Ultimately, investors that reduce trading, storage, and management fees can retain more of gold’s value. BullionVault offers an easier way to buy, store and sell physical gold at wholesale prices, with access to five professional-market vaults worldwide. You may also like Gold6 months ago Gold or Stocks? $10K After 25 Years Gold or Stocks? See how $10K since 2000 grew, and why gold leads on wealth preservation. Gold6 months ago Charted: A Decade of Central Bank Gold Purchases Central bank gold buying has reshaped the market over the past decade. This piece charts the trend and spotlights 2025’s leading buyers—and why it matters. Subscribe Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Join 375,000+ email subscribers: *Sign Up

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Ranked: America’s Top Non-Ivy League Universities 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 MIT and Stanford rank ahead of every Ivy League university in the 2026 QS World University Rankings. California has three of the top five non-Ivy schools: Stanford, Caltech, and UC Berkeley. Public universities make up a major part of the list, including UC Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA, and Purdue. The Ivy League is often shorthand for elite higher education in the U.S., but many of America’s highest-ranked universities sit outside that group. Two non-Ivy schools, MIT and Stanford, rank ahead of every Ivy League university in the 2026 QS World University Rankings. This graphic ranks the top 25 non-Ivy League universities in the U.S. using 2026 data from QS World University Rankings, which scores universities based on academic reputation, research, employability, sustainability, and global engagement. Surpassing the Ivy Leagues MIT and Stanford are the clearest examples of how U.S. academic prestige extends beyond the Ivy League. Both rank ahead of every Ivy League university in the 2026 QS World University Rankings, with MIT earning a perfect score of 100 and Stanford scoring 98.9. The following data table lists non-Ivy League universities in the U.S. alongside their QS score for 2026. RankUniversityStateScore 1MITMassachussetts100 2Stanford UniversityCalifornia98.9 3CaltechCalifornia94.3 4University of ChicagoIllinois93 5UC BerkeleyCalifornia91.2 6Johns HopkinsMaryland89.7 7Northwestern UniversityIllinois85.1 8University of Michigan-Ann ArborMichigan84.7 9UCLACalifornia84.4 10Carnegie Mellon UniversityPennsylvania82.3 11New York UniversityNew York81.1 12Duke UniversityNorth Carolina79 13UC San DiegoCalifornia76.9 14UT AustinTexas76.4 15University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignIllinois75.9 16University of WashingtonWashington72.7 17Pennsylvania State UniversityPennsylvania72.6 18Boston UniversityMassachussetts71.1 18Purdue UniversityIndiana71.1 20University of Wisconsin-MadisonWisconsin66.6 21UC DavisCalifornia66.3 22Rice UniversityTexas65.7 23Georgia Institute of TechnologyGeorgia65.5 24UNC Chapel HillNorth Carolina63.2 25Texas A&MTexas63 Decades of academic excellence have turned MIT and Stanford into intellectual centers that power their regions. More than 100 MIT alumni have gone on to win the Nobel Prize, and the university is best known for its contributions to engineering, science, and technology. Meanwhile, Stanford played a key role in the mid-20th-century creation of Silicon Valley in the Bay Area. Its alumni include the presidents of six countries and multiple Supreme Court justices. California’s Clear Concentration California has the strongest showing of any state in the ranking, led by Stanford, Caltech, UC Berkeley, and UCLA. This concentration reflects the state’s mix of private research powerhouses and major public universities. The UC system spans 10 campuses across the state and serves roughly 300,000 students. In addition to UC Berkeley, the Los Angeles (84.4), San Diego (76.9), and Davis (66.3) campuses are also world-renowned for their academic rigor and contributions to both STEM fields and the social sciences. Alongside high-research universities like Caltech, the UC system has helped shape California’s reputation as a center of intellectual rigor and entrepreneurship. Major Schools in the Midwest While regions west of the Mississippi River have relatively few leading universities outside of Texas, Illinois anchors another hub of major non-Ivy colleges, especially around its largest city. The University of Chicago (93) is the fourth-best non-Ivy school in the country. Founded by John D. Rockefeller in 1890, it served throughout the 20th century as a key center for law, nuclear research, chemistry, and political economy. Meanwhile, Northwestern University (85.1), located in the Chicago suburb of Evanston, counts nearly 50 Pulitzer Prize winners among its alumni. Outside the Chicago area, the Midwest is home to leading universities such as the University of Michigan (84.7), Purdue University (71.1), and the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (75.9). Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about this topic, check out the The U.S. Dominates the World University Ranking on Voronoi.

Ranked: The World’s Largest Importers in 2025 See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources. Key Takeaways The U.S. imports $3.5T in goods, over $900B more than China. Asia and Europe dominate global imports, accounting for most of the top 30. Germany stands out, importing far more relative to its economy than other major powers. Despite rising trade tensions, the world’s largest economies remain deeply dependent on imports to function. In 2025, the United States remained the world’s top importer, accounting for more than 13% of global goods imports. From energy and raw materials to finished products, global supply chains remain critical to both consumption and industrial output. This graphic ranks the world’s 30 largest importers using the latest available data from the World Trade Organization. The U.S. is the World’s Top Import Market In 2025, the United States remained the world’s largest importer by a wide margin. The $3.5 trillion imported by the U.S. is nearly a trillion dollars more than second-place China ($2.6 trillion). The massive surge in U.S. imports from countries like Canada, China, Japan, and Mexico in recent decades has led to Washington running an over $1 trillion trade deficit, larger than any other country. The strong U.S. dollar also makes imports cheaper—reinforcing America’s role as the world’s largest buyer of goods. This data table lists the world’s top 30 largest importers alongside their total import value in 2025. RankCountryValue (Billion USD)Global Share (%) 1 United States3,50713.2 2 China2,5839.7 3 Germany1,5435.8 4 United Kingdom9493.6 5 Netherlands8703.3 6 Hong Kong8323.1 7 France7863.0 8 Japan7562.8 9 India7532.8 10 Mexico6832.6 11 Italy6692.5 12 South Korea6322.4 13 United Arab Emirates6192.3 14 Canada5772.2 15 Belgium5382.0 16 Spain5131.9 17 Switzerland5071.9 18 Singapore5061.9 19 Taiwan4941.9 20 Vietnam4541.7 21 Poland4211.6 22 Turkey3651.4 23 Thailand3451.3 24 Malaysia3401.3 25 Australia3111.2 26 Russia3031.1 27 Brazil2941.1 28 Saudi Arabia2541.0 29 Czech Republic2531.0 30 Indonesia2420.9 -- Top 30 Importers21,89982.5 Many across the U.S. push for the country to reduce its imports and produce more domestically, particularly in manufacturing. High-value goods such as cars, of which the U.S. imported over $216 billion in 2024, are particular points of tension, as well as products made overseas by U.S. firms like Apple’s iPhones. However, the reality of international supply chains is that even many locally-made products require different imported input components, from car parts to steel to processors. As a result, trade protectionism in the world’s largest consumer market also has an impact on American manufacturers. China: A Different Type of Importer While the U.S. imports primarily finished consumer goods, China’s import profile looks very different—focused heavily on raw materials that power its manufacturing engine. Primary goods such as iron, oil, and soybeans dominate Chinese imports, although there are also key finished products like semiconductors which are essential for local manufacturing. China maintains a fairly major trade surplus of over $1 trillion, although Beijing does run a deficit with certain large emerging markets like Brazil. Neighboring Hong Kong also imported over $832 billion worth of goods in 2025, with only $232 billion of these being retained imports for local consumption, contrary to goods which were then reexported. Germany: Punching Above Its Weight Germany stands out among major economies: despite its smaller size, it imports far more relative to GDP than either the U.S. or China, reflecting its deep integration into global supply chains. Germany’s $1.5 trillion in 2025 imports is over half of the Chinese total and over 40% of the total for the far larger U.S. economy. Close trade ties within Europe have made Germany one of the most interconnected economies in global trade. Meanwhile, the country has long depended on foreign energy imports to power its world-renowned domestic industry. Learn More on the Voronoi App If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Global Trade Dominance: U.S., EU, or China (2000 vs. 2024) on Voronoi.Use This Visualization

Published 9 hours ago on April 28, 2026 By Ryan Bellefontaine Graphics & Design Abha Patil Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest Email The following content is sponsored by National Public Utilities Council Mapped: The States Most Prepared for Power Demand Surges Key Takeaways Florida leads all states with 3,003 MW in potential peak demand savings. Alabama and Minnesota also rank highly, each exceeding 2,000 MW. Rhode Island and Wyoming report no demand-response capacity. Extreme weather, electrification, AI, and data centers are putting more pressure on America’s power grids. As demand rises, utilities need flexible tools to reduce strain before outages occur. But which states lead on flexibility? This graphic, in partnership with the National Public Utilities Council, shows the states most prepared for power demand surges using peak potential demand savings data from the EIA. The States That Can Cut the Most Power Demand Demand-response programs help utilities lower electricity use during high-stress periods. For example, customers may reduce consumption or shift usage away from peak hours, often in exchange for compensation. Here is a table showing potential peak-demand savings in MW by state in 2024. StatePotential Peak Demand Savings in 2024 (MW) FL3,003 AL2,153 MN2,009 NC1,858 MI1,550 SC1,324 GA1,266 IL1,143 NY1,070 CA1,061 TX1,050 AR1,024 TN991 OK869 NE857 ND854 WI830 CO795 IA759 KY732 IN671 OH668 MD613 AZ555 MS522 ID466 UT336 MO307 LA267 DE246 NV200 SD180 OR178 VA163 KS143 CT135 MA120 WA112 VT72 NM69 HI58 MT52 PA43 WV34 NJ27 DC20 AK18 ME15 NH5 RI0 WY0 Florida ranks first, with 3,003 MW in potential peak demand savings. Alabama follows at 2,153 MW, while Minnesota places third at 2,009 MW. Together, these states demonstrate how demand-response capacity can buffer the grid during grid stress. Meanwhile, data center power demand continues to rise as AI adoption grows. The Southeast Leads the Rankings Florida and Alabama lead the nation, supported by demand-response programs from utilities including FPL, Duke Energy Florida, Alabama Power, and TVA. North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia also rank in the top seven. As a result, the Southeast stands out for its ability to manage demand spikes. These programs can help utilities avoid outages without adding new generation immediately. Where Capacity Is Limited—and Why It Matters At the other end, Rhode Island and Wyoming report no demand-response capacity. That leaves fewer options to cut demand when electricity use surges. Several northeastern states, including New Hampshire, Maine, and New Jersey, also report minimal demand-response capacity. As U.S. electricity demand rises from data center construction after years of slower growth, demand-response programs give utilities an important tool to manage peak stress. Related Topics: #data centers #florida #ai #electricity #power #energy You may also like Energy4 weeks ago Ranked: The Most Consistent U.S. Power Sources A look at which U.S. power sources run most consistently, and why nuclear remains central as utility demand grows. AI1 month ago U.S. States Winning and Losing Data Center Market Share Which U.S. states are winning the data center race? This visualization shows the states gaining and losing data center market share in the next two years. Environment2 months ago Mapped: Carbon Offsets by U.S. State Which states dominate carbon offsets? This U.S. map shows the hotspots as utilities respond to the AI electricity surge. Energy7 months ago Ranked: The Top 10 Cleanest Operating Utilities In The U.S. Just four U.S. utilities operate with over 80% carbon-free generation. This graphic ranks the top 10 cleanest utilities by their fuel mix. Energy1 year ago Visualized: Offshore Wind Installations by Region (2023–2033) This streamgraph shows projected offshore wind capacity by region, according to The Global Wind Energy Council. Energy1 year ago Ranked: The Largest Power Outages in the U.S. (2013–2023) Severe weather caused all ten of the largest U.S. power outages in the past decade, highlighting the importance of grid resiliency. Batteries1 year ago Visualized: Countries by Grid Storage Battery Capacity in 2023 This treemap chart uses data from Statistical Review of World Energy to show the top 10 countries with the most battery storage capacity in 2023. Energy2 years ago Visualized: Which Countries Capture the Most Carbon? This voronoi depicts the countries that capture the most carbon globally in 2023, with data from Rystad Energy. Energy2 years ago Ranked: Energy Transition Scores by Country in 2024 This bar chart shows the countries’ highest and lowest energy transition index scores determined by the World Economic Forum. Energy2 years ago Ranked: America’s Cheapest Sources of Electricity in 2024 This dumbbell plot shows the most and least expensive sources of energy in the U.S., using data from Lazard. Energy2 years ago Visualized: Emission Reduction Targets by Country in 2024 This infographic shows the greenhouse gas emissions targets of all countries and their target years with data from Net Zero Tracker. Green2 years ago Visualized: The Price of Carbon Around the World in 2024 This bar chart shows the varying prices of carbon across different economies around the globe, using data from the World Bank. Energy2 years ago Visualized: Renewable Energy Capacity Through Time (2000–2023) This streamgraph shows the growth in renewable energy capacity by country and region since 2000. Environment2 years ago The Rise in America’s Billion-Dollar Extreme Weather Disasters From tropical cyclones to severe storms, the number of extreme weather disasters with losses exceeding $1 billion has climbed over time. Environment2 years ago The Most Polluted Cities in the U.S. What are the most polluted cities in the U.S. according to data from the American Lung Association’s 2024 State of the Air Report? Energy4 years ago Visualizing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector The U.S. emits about 6 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases a year. Here’s how these emissions rank by sector. Sponsored5 years ago Road to Decarbonization: The United States Electricity Mix Can America become carbon-free by 2035? This graphic breaks down the United States’ electricity mix, by state. Sponsored5 years ago Road to Decarbonization: U.S. Coal Plant Closures This infographic highlights announced coal plant closures in the U.S. and how much power will be affected. Subscribe Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Join 375,000+ email subscribers: *Sign Up

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization Ranked: The World’s 50 Largest Banks by Assets 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 The world’s 50 largest banks hold $101.6 trillion in assets combined. Chinese banks dominate the ranking, led by the four largest banks in the world. JPMorgan Chase ranks fifth by assets, but remains the world’s most valuable bank by market capitalization. Banks sit at the center of the global financial system, and the assets they hold help move credit, deposits, and liquidity through the economy. Together, the world’s 50 largest banks hold $101.6 trillion in assets, a total approaching the world’s $111 trillion government debt load in 2025. This graphic ranks the 50 largest banks in the world by total assets, using data from CompaniesMarketCap as of April 15, 2026. The figures represent each bank’s total assets for the most recent reporting period and include cash and cash equivalents, loans, investments, properties, and equipment. Chinese and American Banks Hold the Most Assets Chinese banks dominate the top of the ranking. The four largest banks in the world are all Chinese state-owned lenders: ICBC, Agricultural Bank of China, China Construction Bank, and Bank of China. Together, those four institutions hold $25.5 trillion, or roughly one-quarter of the $101.6 trillion total of the top 50 banks. The data table below shows the values of the 50 largest global banks’ assets, along with the country of each bank. RankBankTotal Assets (Billions, USD)Country 1ICBC$7,300 China 2Agricultural Bank of China$6,800 China 3China Construction Bank$6,200 China 4Bank of China$5,300 China 5JPMorgan Chase$4,400 United States 6Bank of America$3,400 United States 7BNP Paribas$3,300 France 8HSBC$3,200 United Kingdom 9Crédit Agricole$2,800 France 10Mitsubishi UFJ Financial$2,700 Japan 11Citigroup$2,700 United States 12Postal Savings Bank of China$2,500 China 13Santander$2,200 Spain 14Bank of Communications$2,200 China 15Wells Fargo$2,200 United States 16Barclays$2,100 United Kingdom 17Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group$2,000 Japan 18Mizuho Financial Group$1,900 Japan 19Société Générale$1,800 France 20Goldman Sachs$1,800 United States 21CM Bank$1,800 China 22Royal Bank Of Canada$1,700 Canada 23Deutsche Bank$1,700 Germany 24UBS$1,600 Switzerland 25Japan Post Bank$1,600 Japan 26Toronto Dominion Bank$1,500 Canada 27Industrial Bank$1,500 China 28Morgan Stanley$1,400 United States 29CITIC Bank$1,400 China 30Shanghai Pudong Development Bank$1,400 China 31Lloyds Banking Group$1,300 United Kingdom 32ING$1,200 Netherlands 33Intesa Sanpaolo$1,100 Italy 34China Minsheng Bank$1,100 China 35Scotiabank$1,100 Canada 36Schweizerische Nationalbank$1,100 Switzerland 37Bank of Montreal$1,100 Canada 38UniCredit$1,000 Italy 39China Everbright Bank$1,000 China 40Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria$1,000 Spain 41NatWest Group$962 United Kingdom 42Commonwealth Bank$944 Australia 43Standard Chartered$920 United Kingdom 44State Bank of India$878 India 45ANZ Bank$857 Australia 46CIBC (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce)$832 Canada 47Ping An Bank$820 China 48CaixaBank$780 Spain 49Nordea Bank$769 Finland 50DBS Group$699 Singapore The U.S. comes next, led by JPMorgan Chase with $4.4 trillion in assets and Bank of America with $3.4 trillion. The rest of the top 10 is rounded out by three European banks (BNP Paribas, HSBC, Crédit Agricole) and one Japanese lender (Mitsubishi UFJ). A large part of banks’ assets are cash and liquid assets, partly because regulators require them to withstand market stress and funding pressure. Regional Concentration Among Global Banks Asia leads the ranking, holding nearly half of the assets of the world’s 50 largest lenders. Region# of BanksAverage Assets per BankTotal Assets (USD, Billions) Asia19$2,584$49,097 Europe18$1,602$28,831 North America11$2,012$22,132 Other2$901$1,801 That dominance is driven overwhelmingly by 13 Chinese banks, which alone account for about 39% of the total. Europe ranks second, largely on volume rather than scale: it has nearly as many banks on the list as Asia (18 vs. 19), yet those institutions are generally smaller, averaging just $1.6 trillion in assets per bank compared with Asia’s $2.6 trillion. North America is anchored by six U.S. banks and five Canadian ones, giving the region fewer banks than Europe but larger institutions on average. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn about the assets held by central banks, check out this graphic, which visualizes the top 20 central banks by assets.

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app. Use This Visualization The States Landing the Most Foreign Investment 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 Arizona leads by a wide margin, attracting nearly $200B in foreign investment since 2020. The top five states account for over half of all announced investment. Semiconductor, EV, and clean energy projects are driving the largest commitments. Since 2020, nearly $1 trillion in foreign capital has been committed to U.S. projects—often through a small number of very large investments. Using data from fDi Intelligence, this map shows where that capital is being deployed, based on announced commitments between 2020 and 2025. Arizona accounts for the largest share at nearly $200 billion, driven by major semiconductor projects. Other leading states, including Texas, North Carolina, and Georgia, are attracting investment tied to EVs, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. Arizona Leads in U.S. Foreign Investment Arizona captured over 20% of total U.S. foreign capital commitments since 2020, fueled by TSMC’s $165 billion megaproject. As the largest single foreign direct investment (FDI) project in U.S. history, it highlights how semiconductor manufacturing is becoming a cornerstone of domestic industrial policy. Over the next decade, these facilities are expected to generate thousands of jobs and anchor long-term supply chains in the region. The table below ranks all states by announced FDI. The top five alone account for more than half of total inflows, reflecting how a small number of large projects are shaping the national picture. RankState or DistrictForeign Direct Investment2020-2025Share 1Arizona$196.2B20.3% 2Texas$158.3B16.4% 3North Carolina$49.9B5.2% 4California$49.9B5.2% 5Georgia$41.2B4.3% 6New York$38.7B4.0% 7Louisiana$37.4B3.9% 8Indiana$29.5B3.1% 9Tennessee$25.4B2.6% 10Ohio$25.2B2.6% 11Illinois$24.9B2.6% 12Kentucky$23.8B2.5% 13Florida$23.0B2.4% 14South Carolina$21.9B2.3% 15Michigan$18.2B1.9% 16Virginia$17.7B1.8% 17Pennsylvania$17.4B1.8% 18New Jersey$12.6B1.3% 19Alabama$11.6B1.2% 20Oklahoma$11.2B1.2% 21Maryland$10.2B1.1% 22Massachusetts$9.9B1.0% 23Colorado$9.1B0.9% 24New Mexico$8.3B0.9% 25Nevada$8.2B0.8% 26Kansas$7.5B0.8% 27Wisconsin$7.4B0.8% 28West Virginia$6.3B0.7% 29Washington$5.7B0.6% 30Mississippi$5.5B0.6% 31Missouri$5.4B0.6% 32Utah$4.9B0.5% 33Oregon$4.7B0.5% 34Arkansas$4.5B0.5% 35Minnesota$4.3B0.4% 36Connecticut$3.4B0.3% 37Alaska$3.2B0.3% 38North Dakota$2.8B0.3% 39Vermont$2.6B0.3% 40Idaho$2.6B0.3% 41South Dakota$2.5B0.3% 42Wyoming$2.5B0.3% 43Maine$2.3B0.2% 44New Hampshire$1.8B0.2% 45Iowa$1.8B0.2% 46Delaware$1.7B0.2% 47Nebraska$1.2B0.1% 48Washington D.C.$1.1B0.1% 49Rhode Island$850M0.1% 50Hawaii$590M0.1% 51Montana$130M0.01% Texas attracted $158 billion in investment, led by Samsung’s $44 billion chip facility. Beyond semiconductors, the state is also seeing strong inflows into data centers and clean energy, reinforcing its position as one of America’s top investment hubs. Automakers are also investing heavily in the Southeast. Toyota is building a $13.9 billion EV battery plant in North Carolina, while Hyundai is investing $12.7 billion in Georgia, cementing the region’s role in EV supply chains. The States Being Left Behind Beyond the top tier, investment levels drop off quickly. While leading states are attracting tens—or even hundreds—of billions, many others are seeing only modest inflows. Overall, 20 states attracted less than $5 billion each, with Montana ($130 million), Hawaii ($590 million), and Rhode Island ($850 million) ranking at the bottom. Many of these states have smaller labor pools that limit their ability to support large-scale projects. Meanwhile, higher-cost states like Oregon and Minnesota face regulatory pressures that may be limiting their ability to capture more investment. Instead, foreign investment is increasingly clustering in states that can support large-scale industrial projects—particularly in semiconductors, EVs, and clean energy—leaving much of the country on the sidelines. Learn More on the Voronoi App To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the share of U.S. exports by state.

Mapped: The Countries Most in Debt to the IMF This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources. Key Takeaways Argentina owes over $60B to the IMF—far more than any other country. More than 80 countries currently owe the IMF, spanning every region. African nations make up the largest share of borrowers, though typically with smaller loans. Dozens of countries are currently relying on the International Monetary Fund as economic pressures strain public finances. This map, created by Iswardi Ishak using International Monetary Fund (IMF) data, shows outstanding IMF credit by country as of April 2026. While borrowing is widespread, a handful of countries account for a disproportionate share—led by Argentina, which stands far ahead of the rest. The Biggest IMF Borrowers Argentina isn’t just the largest IMF borrower—it’s in a league of its own, owing nearly four times more than the next-largest country. With over $60 billion in outstanding credit, Argentina’s total reflects a long cycle of inflation crises, currency instability, and repeated IMF programs stretching back decades. Below, we break down the global distribution of IMF debt and highlight the largest borrowers. RankMemberIMF Debt (USD, millions)IMF Debt as share of GDP (%) 1 Argentina60,1768.7 2 Ukraine15,4816.9 3 Egypt10,6692.5 4 Pakistan10,5002.6 5 Ecuador10,0827.3 6 Côte d'Ivoire5,1895.3 7 Kenya4,2162.9 8 Bangladesh4,1570.8 9 Ghana3,9473.3 10 Angola3,5102.3 11 Congo (DRC)3,2013.5 12 Costa Rica2,5552.3 13 Ethiopia2,5412.1 14 Sri Lanka2,5372.6 15 Jordan2,3713.7 16 Tanzania1,9232.0 17 Zambia1,8314.4 18 Cameroon1,6842.6 19 Sudan1,4283.2 20 Uganda1,3781.9 21 Morocco1,3500.7 22 Jamaica1,2785.6 23 Papua New Guinea1,2373.6 24 Serbia1,2261.1 25 Senegal1,2143.0 26 Benin1,1634.2 27 Moldova1,0164.6 28 Madagascar9884.7 29 Rwanda8304.8 30 Niger6742.7 31 Honduras6581.6 32 Suriname62010.5 33 Chad6102.4 34 Barbados5746.8 35 Nepal5651.2 36 Tunisia5550.9 37 Mauritania5433.8 38 Mali5201.5 39 Gabon5142.2 40 Sierra Leone5066.1 41 Congo, Republic of4993.2 42 Afghanistan4992.5 43 Burkina Faso4801.5 44 Georgia4661.1 45 Togo4323.2 46 Guinea4221.4 47 Malawi3882.1 48 South Sudan3546.2 49 Paraguay3340.6 50 Central African Republic2998.6 51 North Macedonia2781.5 52 Liberia2644.7 53 El Salvador2480.6 54 Myanmar2360.3 55 Haiti2210.6 56 The Gambia2177.8 57 Kosovo2051.5 58 Tajikistan1800.9 59 Somalia1681.2 60 Seychelles1496.6 61 Burundi1441.8 62 Uzbekistan1190.1 63 Cabo Verde1183.4 64 Kyrgyzstan880.4 65 Mongolia820.3 66 Guinea-Bissau812.7 67 Armenia710.2 68 Nicaragua620.3 69 Equatorial Guinea450.3 70 Sao Tome & Principe444.5 71 Djibouti410.9 72 Bosnia and Herzegovina380.1 73 Comoros382.1 74 St. Lucia281.1 75 St. Vincent and the Grenadines272.3 76 Maldives240.3 77 Grenada231.6 78 Samoa211.5 79 Albania210.1 80 Tonga202.8 81 Lesotho150.5 82 Dominica131.7 83 Solomon Islands90.5 The next largest borrowers include Ukraine, Egypt, and Pakistan. Meanwhile, dozens of countries owe under $1 billion, particularly across Africa. Suriname stands out on a relative basis rather than in absolute terms. The South American nation has the highest IMF debt as a share of GDP, reflecting a severe economic crisis in the early 2020s. After years of fiscal mismanagement, declining oil revenues, and mounting external debt, Suriname defaulted on its sovereign obligations in 2020. This triggered an IMF-supported restructuring program aimed at stabilizing public finances and curbing inflation. The adjustment process has involved significant austerity measures and currency depreciation. Why Countries Turn to the IMF Countries typically borrow from the IMF during periods of economic distress. These situations often fall into a few common categories: Balance of payments crises: When nations cannot pay for imports or service external debt. Currency instability: Sharp devaluations or loss of foreign reserves. Fiscal imbalances: Large government deficits and rising public debt. For example, Argentina has repeatedly sought IMF assistance amid inflation and currency crises, while nations like Sri Lanka and Pakistan have turned to the IMF during severe external debt pressures. How IMF Debt Works Unlike traditional loans, IMF financing is denominated in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), an international reserve asset created by the IMF. SDRs are based on a basket of major currencies: U.S. dollar Euro Chinese yuan Japanese yen British pound Countries receive SDR allocations or loans, which can then be exchanged for hard currency. For this dataset, IMF figures were converted into U.S. dollars (roughly $1.44 per SDR). Africa’s Prominent Role Among Borrowers Africa stands out not for the size of its IMF loans, but for how widespread they are. The continent has the highest number of borrowing countries, reflecting persistent structural challenges that make external financing a recurring necessity. This reflects structural challenges such as: Commodity dependence Limited fiscal capacity Exposure to external shocks Many African nations borrow relatively smaller amounts, but their reliance on IMF support is widespread. Criticism and Controversy Despite its role as a financial backstop, the IMF has faced criticism over its policy conditions. Loan programs often require economic reforms, such as austerity measures, that can be politically and socially challenging. Critics argue these conditions can slow growth or worsen inequality, while supporters say they are necessary for long-term stability. Learn More on the Voronoi App Explore related insights on global debt dynamics in this visualization: Africa’s Chinese Debt.

Ranked: The World’s Biggest Coal Consumers 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 China accounts for 55.8% of global coal consumption, using more than the rest of the world combined. China and India together make up nearly 70% of global coal demand. The U.S. ranks third at 4.8%, followed by Indonesia (2.9%) and Japan (2.7%). Vietnam and Indonesia saw the fastest coal consumption growth from 2023 to 2024. Coal consumption is highly concentrated among a small number of major economies, with China sitting far ahead of every other country. This chart ranks the world’s largest coal consumers using data from the Statistical Review of World Energy 2025, highlighting how demand is distributed across major economies. China’s Outsized Role in Global Coal Use China consumed 92.2 exajoules of coal in 2024, equal to 55.8% of the global total. This reflects the scale of the country’s industrial base, electricity needs, and continued reliance on coal-fired power, even as it rapidly expands renewable energy capacity. Below we list the biggest coal consumers based on 2024 data: RankCountryExajoules of coal use (2024)Share 1 China92.255.8% 2 India23.013.9% 3 U.S.7.94.8% 4 Indonesia4.72.9% 5 Japan4.52.7% 6 Russia3.82.3% 7 South Africa3.52.1% 8 South Korea2.91.7% 9 Vietnam2.51.5% 10 Türkiye1.81.1% 11 Germany1.61.0% 12 Australia1.50.9% 13 Kazakhstan1.50.9% 14 Other13.88.4% 15 World Total165.1100.0% Together, China and India account for nearly 70% of global coal consumption, underscoring how concentrated demand is between the world’s two most populous countries. Beyond these two giants, the U.S. ranks third with 4.8% of global consumption, followed by Indonesia (2.9%), Japan (2.7%), and Russia (2.3%). Where Coal Consumption is Still Growing As countries transition toward cleaner energy, coal demand is moving in different directions. While usage has declined in many advanced economies, it continues to rise in several fast-growing countries where energy demand is still expanding. The following table shows where coal use grew the most in top coal consumers between 2023 and 2024: Country2023 (Exajoules)2024 (Exajoules)Change Vietnam2.32.59.3% Indonesia4.34.79.0% Türkiye1.71.87.1% India22.123.03.7% South Africa3.43.51.9% China90.792.21.4% Vietnam saw the biggest increase at 9.3%, followed closely by Indonesia at 9.0%. Türkiye also posted strong growth at 7.1%, while India’s consumption rose by 3.7%. Even China, already the world’s largest coal consumer by a wide margin, saw demand rise by 1.4% in 2024. While coal use is declining across much of the West, it continues to grow in several emerging economies—highlighting the uneven pace of the global energy transition. Editor’s note: A previous version of this post had incorrect data. It has now been updated to reflect the most recent data based on the Statistical Review of World Energy published in 2025. Learn More on the Voronoi App See the biggest sources of energy around the world in every country in this global map.