MoreRSS

site iconVisual CapitalistModify

By highlighting the bigger picture through data-driven visuals, we stay true to our mission to help cut through the clutter and simplify a complex world.
Please copy the RSS to your reader, or quickly subscribe to:

Inoreader Feedly Follow Feedbin Local Reader

Rss preview of Blog of Visual Capitalist

Mapped: How Much U.S. Population Growth Comes From Immigration

2026-04-22 19:38:16

See more visualizations like this on the Voronoi app.

Map showing immigration's share of population growth by state from 2021-2025 by state.

Use This Visualization

How Much U.S. Population Growth Comes From Immigration

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

  • Immigration accounted for 81% of U.S. population growth from 2021–2025.
  • In 14 states, it drove 100% of growth, fully offsetting domestic losses.
  • Without immigration, many states would be shrinking in population.

Immigration is now the primary engine of U.S. population growth, and in some places, the only one.

From 2021 to 2025, over four out of every five new U.S. residents came from international migration, according to data from the Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies. In 14 states, immigration accounted for 100% of population gains, meaning growth would have been negative without it.

This map shows how much each state relies on immigration, revealing a divide between states gaining residents organically and those sustained almost entirely by global inflows.

Where Immigration Is the Only Source of Growth

In many states, population growth depends entirely on immigration.

This table shows immigration’s share of population change by state from 2021–2025. If immigration exceeds total population growth, the share is capped at 100%:

State Net International Immigration’s
Share of Population Growth
2021–2025
Total Population
Change
2021-2025
Alaska 100% 4,364
Connecticut 100% 108,853
District of Columbia 100% 22,687
Kansas 100% 38,946
Maryland 100% 86,960
Massachusetts 100% 168,764
Michigan 100% 55,590
New Jersey 100% 277,739
New Mexico 100% 7,052
Ohio 100% 101,976
Oregon 100% 30,042
Pennsylvania 100% 63,856
Rhode Island 100% 18,034
Vermont 100% 1,698
Iowa 95% 47,306
Wisconsin 89% 75,416
Virginia 85% 242,804
Kentucky 83% 98,593
Minnesota 81% 119,843
Washington 81% 274,208
Nebraska 74% 54,688
North Dakota 66% 19,746
Indiana 64% 183,043
Florida 60% 1,871,193
Missouri 60% 115,467
Colorado 58% 225,688
Maine 42% 50,328
Nevada 42% 165,337
Georgia 41% 570,153
Texas 41% 2,471,926
Arizona 37% 437,171
Alabama 34% 160,126
New Hampshire 33% 36,590
Oklahoma 33% 158,045
Utah 33% 254,934
Arkansas 32% 100,392
North Carolina 31% 747,753
Tennessee 30% 387,340
Delaware 29% 68,062
South Dakota 27% 47,286
Wyoming 24% 11,084
South Carolina 20% 438,282
Idaho 13% 180,405
Montana 8% 57,538
California N/A (Population Decline) -172,499
Hawaii N/A (Population Decline) -18,310
Illinois N/A (Population Decline) -76,207
Louisiana N/A (Population Decline) -33,956
Mississippi N/A (Population Decline) -4,225
New York N/A (Population Decline) -119,835
West Virginia N/A (Population Decline) -25,523

Florida and Texas led the nation in population growth, but for different reasons. Both gained more than one million international migrants between 2021 and 2025.

But their growth drivers differ. Florida combined strong immigration with large domestic inflows, despite negative natural change. Texas saw growth across all fronts, including a strong natural increase.

This contrast highlights a broader trend. While every state recorded net international migration during this period, many also faced domestic outflows or aging populations. In fact, 25 states saw net domestic outflows, while 21 recorded more deaths than births, making immigration the decisive factor separating growth from decline.

Texas added over 691,000 people through natural growth alone, more than California and New York combined.

When Growth Isn’t Enough: The California Example

California highlights the imbalance: despite nearly one million international arrivals and more births than deaths, the state still saw overall population decline driven by domestic outflows.

Seven states in total lost population over this period, underscoring how internal migration can outweigh both natural change and immigration.

The Future of Immigration and U.S. Population Growth

A sharp slowdown could reshape this map.

In 2026, U.S. immigration is expected to fall to 321,000, less than a fifth of the level seen in 2025. At the same time, natural population change is projected to remain flat.

For states highly dependent on immigration, this may mean slower growth or even population decline.

Over the past five years, six states, including Oregon and Michigan, experienced both domestic outmigration and negative natural change, leaving immigration as their primary source of growth.

States where immigration plays the largest role in population gains are also the most exposed to a slowdown, with potential ripple effects across:

  • Tax receipts
  • Consumer spending
  • Housing demand
  • Labor force growth

As natural growth fades, migration, both domestic and international, will determine which states continue to grow and which begin to fall behind.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on America’s fastest-growing states from 2025 to 2050.

Ranked: Education Spending Per Student by Country

2026-04-22 01:48:00

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Graphic showing education spending per student by country, based on OECD data.

Use This Visualization

Ranked: Education Spending Per Student by Country

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

  • Luxembourg spends over $31,000 per student, far ahead of every other country.
  • Most advanced economies cluster between $18,000 and $21,000 per student.
  • Spending falls below $6,000 in major economies like China, Türkiye, and Mexico.

Education spending per student varies widely across countries, reflecting differences in national priorities and resources.

At the top of the ranking, Luxembourg stands alone, spending far more per student than any other country. Beyond this upper tier, spending levels diverge quickly across both advanced and emerging economies.

This chart ranks countries by annual education spending per student, using PPP-adjusted data from the OECD’s Education at a Glance 2025.

These differences influence everything from class sizes and teacher pay to access to technology and higher education outcomes.

Top Spenders Cluster in Europe and North America

Luxembourg stands far above all peers, spending over $31,000 per student, nearly $9,000 more than second-place Norway and several times higher than lower-ranked countries. The country also leads in teacher salaries.

Rank Country Expenditure per student (in USD PPP)
1 🇱🇺 Luxembourg 31,439
2 🇳🇴 Norway 22,558
3 🇦🇹 Austria 20,942
4 🇺🇸 United States 20,387
5 🇰🇷 South Korea 19,805
6 🇩🇰 Denmark 19,229
7 🇳🇱 Netherlands 19,186
8 🇬🇧 United Kingdom 19,072
9 🇧🇪 Belgium 19,024
10 🇨🇦 Canada 18,733
11 🇮🇸 Iceland 18,707
12 🇩🇪 Germany 17,960
13 🇸🇪 Sweden 17,804
14 🇦🇺 Australia 17,529
15 🇮🇪 Ireland 15,915
16 🇫🇷 France 15,427
17 🌍 OECD average 15,023
18 🇫🇮 Finland 15,000
19 🇸🇮 Slovenia 14,454
20 🇯🇵 Japan 14,130
21 🇮🇹 Italy 13,750
22 🇪🇸 Spain 13,385
23 🇵🇹 Portugal 12,956
24 🇮🇱 Israel 12,877
25 🇨🇿 Czechia 12,844
26 🇳🇿 New Zealand 12,389
27 🇪🇪 Estonia 12,362
28 🇵🇱 Poland 11,488
29 🇱🇹 Lithuania 11,313
30 🇸🇰 Slovakia 11,259
31 🇭🇺 Hungary 10,097
32 🇱🇻 Latvia 9,204
33 🇭🇷 Croatia 9,033
34 🇧🇬 Bulgaria 8,703
35 🇨🇱 Chile 8,068
36 🇷🇴 Romania 7,221
37 🇬🇷 Greece 7,137
38 🇹🇷 Türkiye 5,305
39 🇨🇳 China 5,161
40 🇿🇦 South Africa 4,395
41 🇲🇽 Mexico 4,066
42 🇵🇪 Peru 2,612
-- OECD Average 15,022

The U.S. and several Western European countries also rank near the top, typically spending between $18,000 and $21,000. These high levels reflect both strong public funding and the higher costs of education systems.

Canada and the United Kingdom also fall within this upper tier, underscoring consistent investment across advanced economies.

OECD Average Masks Wide Gaps

While the OECD average is about $15,000 per student, most countries fall far from this midpoint, clustering either well above it in Western Europe and North America or far below it in emerging economies.

Countries like Japan, Italy, and Spain fall below the average despite being advanced economies. Meanwhile, emerging European economies such as Poland and Hungary spend closer to $10,000–$11,000.

Spending Drops Sharply Outside Advanced Economies

Outside the OECD’s highest spenders, education investment drops off rapidly.

Türkiye and China spend just over $5,000 per student, while Mexico and South Africa are closer to $4,000. Peru sits at the bottom of the ranking at roughly $2,600 per student.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Comparing Education Levels Across 45 Countries on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Charted: Compute Costs More Than Talent in AI

2026-04-22 00:28:26

AI WEEK IS HERE ONLY ON VISUAL CAPITALIST APRIL 20-26 SPONSORED BY TERZO

A comparison graphic showing the cost breakdowns of different AI companies, using data from Epoch AI.

Charted: Compute Costs More Than Talent in AI

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

  • Compute is the largest cost for all three AI firms in the dataset, accounting for 57% to 70% of total spending.
  • At Anthropic, compute spending reaches $6.8 billion in 2025 across model training and inference.
  • In this dataset, compute costs exceed staff and other expenses, highlighting how infrastructure—not talent—drives AI spending.

For leading AI companies, the biggest expense is not talent. It is compute.

This chart from Visual Capitalist’s AI Week, sponsored by Terzo, uses Epoch AI data to compare spending at Anthropic, Minimax, and Z.ai across R&D compute, inference compute, and staff plus other costs.

In every case, compute accounts for the majority of total spending, underscoring how capital-intensive it has become to build and serve frontier AI models.

How AI Company Costs Break Down

Despite differences in scale, all three companies allocate the largest share of their budgets to a single category: compute.

The data below compares spending composition across Anthropic, Minimax, and Z.ai. Anthropic’s figures are for 2025, while Minimax’s are from Q1 to Q3 of 2025 and Z.ai’s are for H1 2025.

Costs Category Anthropic Minimax Z.ai
R&D Compute (Billions, USD) 4.10 0.14 0.18
Inference Compute (Billions, USD) 2.70 0.04 0.01
Staff and Other (Billions, USD) 2.90 0.14 0.12
Total (Billions, USD) 9.70 0.32 0.31
R&D Compute Share 42% 44% 58%
Inference Compute Share 28% 13% 3%
Staff and Other Share 30% 44% 39%

Across all three AI companies, compute is the main cost center. Epoch AI estimates that R&D compute and inference compute together account for 57% to 70% of total spending, making infrastructure more expensive than staff and other costs in every case.

Among the three, Z.ai has the most R&D-heavy profile, with 58% of spending tied to compute powering model development and training.

Anthropic stands out for sheer scale. Epoch AI estimates the company spent $9.7 billion in 2025, including $6.8 billion on compute alone across training and inference.

Its costs are significantly higher than Minimax’s and Z.ai’s, even if the two Chinese AI companies’ figures were annualized to match Anthropic’s full-year period.

Both Chinese companies release many of their models as open source, meaning the model weights are freely available for anyone to download, modify, and run. This strategy helps them compete with better-funded U.S. labs by building developer adoption at a fraction of the cost.

AI Talent Costs Less Than Chips and Compute

One of the clearest takeaways is that talent costs less than compute in this comparison. Even though top AI labs pay some of the highest salaries in tech, staff and other costs still account for less than half of total spending at each of the three firms.

While the chart focuses on costs, Epoch AI estimates these labs are currently spending around 2–3x more than they generate in revenue, even as some expect economics to improve over time.

How These Estimates Were Built

This dataset comes with a few important caveats. Anthropic’s figures are based on reporting from The Information and are more speculative, while Minimax and Z.ai figures come from IPO filings released in January 2026.

The time periods also differ: Anthropic data is for the full year of 2025, Minimax covers 2025 Q1–Q3, and Z.ai covers 2025 H1. Epoch AI says its expense totals include operating expenses, cost of goods and services, and non-cash items such as stock-based compensation.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out The Soaring Revenues of AI Companies on Voronoi.

Mapped: AI Adoption Across Europe

2026-04-21 22:19:12

Mapped: AI Adoption Across 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

  • AI adoption is highest in Northern Europe, with Norway leading the continent at 56%.
  • Major economies like Germany and the UK lag smaller countries, with only about one-third reporting recent use.
  • Across Europe, the map shows a widening adoption gap as AI becomes mainstream faster in some countries than others.

Artificial intelligence is spreading quickly across Europe, but adoption is not happening evenly. A clear divide is emerging between countries where AI is becoming mainstream and those where usage remains relatively low.

This map from Visual Capitalist’s AI Week, sponsored by Terzo, shows the share of people in each European country who used AI in the last three months, based on data from Eurostat and IAB UK.

AI Usage Across Europe

Since the rollout of consumer AI tools in late 2022, Europe has begun to split into clear adoption tiers. Northern European countries dominate the top of the ranking, while several of the continent’s largest economies sit much lower.

The table below shows the share of people in each country who report using AI tools within the last three months.

Rank Country Individuals using AI tools (%)
1 🇳🇴 Norway 56.3
2 🇩🇰 Denmark 48.4
3 🇨🇭 Switzerland 47.0
4 🇪🇪 Estonia 46.6
5 🇲🇹 Malta 46.5
6 🇫🇮 Finland 46.3
7 🇮🇪 Ireland 44.9
8 🇳🇱 Netherlands 44.7
9 🇨🇾 Cyprus 44.2
10 🇬🇷 Greece 44.1
11 🇱🇺 Luxembourg 42.5
12 🇧🇪 Belgium 42.0
13 🇸🇪 Sweden 42.0
14 🇦🇹 Austria 39.4
15 🇵🇹 Portugal 38.7
16 🇪🇸 Spain 37.9
17 🇸🇮 Slovenia 37.6
18 🇫🇷 France 37.5
19 🇱🇹 Lithuania 36.9
20 🇨🇿 Czechia 35.4
21 🇬🇧 UK 34.3
22 🇱🇻 Latvia 33.4
23 🇪🇺 EU 32.7
24 🇩🇪 Germany 32.3
25 🇸🇰 Slovakia 30.8
26 🇭🇺 Hungary 29.6
27 🇭🇷 Croatia 27.5
28 🇵🇱 Poland 22.7
29 🇧🇬 Bulgaria 22.5
30 🇲🇰 North Macedonia 22.0
31 🇧🇦 Bosnia & Herzegovina 20.3
32 🇮🇹 Italy 19.9
33 🇹🇷 Turkey 18.6
34 🇷🇴 Romania 17.8

Eurostat data shows Northern Europe leading the way. Norway ranks first at (56%), followed by Denmark at 48% and Finland at 46%, suggesting AI has already entered the mainstream for a large share of people in these countries.

At the other end of the spectrum, adoption remains far lower in parts of southeastern Europe. Romania ranks last, with fewer than one in five people reporting recent AI use

Mixed Results in the Mediterranean

Across Southern Europe, results varied immensely, with Italy (20%) and even Turkey (19%) seeing less than half the usage reported by their counterparts in Cyprus or Greece (both 44%), to say nothing of Malta (47%).

Meanwhile, the Iberian countries, Spain (38%) and Portugal (39%), reported mid-range figures in line with those seen in Western European peers like France and the United Kingdom.

The high gaps in AI usage across the Mediterranean appears to cut across economic or developmental divides.

Young People Leading the Way

Younger people appear to be accelerating adoption further. In the UK, for example, overall recent AI use stands at 34%, but among those aged 15-24, 24% report using these tools daily.

That points to a second divide beneath the country-level map: even where national adoption looks moderate, AI may already be deeply embedded among younger users in school and early-career workplaces.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out ChatGPT the Only Constant in an Evolving AI Landscape on Voronoi.

 

Ranked: Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026

2026-04-21 19:58:39

See more visuals like this on the Voronoi app.

Graphic showing central banks’ gold purchases in 2026

Use This Visualization

Central Banks Buying and Selling Gold in 2026

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

  • Poland is the largest gold buyer in 2026 so far, adding over 20 tonnes.
  • Emerging markets are driving most purchases as geopolitical risk rises.
  • Russia and Turkey are among the biggest sellers, reflecting fiscal and currency pressures.

Central banks are taking diverging paths on gold in 2026.

While countries like Poland, Uzbekistan, and China are adding to their reserves, others, including Russia and Turkey, are selling to manage economic pressures. The split highlights gold’s dual role as both a geopolitical hedge and a source of liquidity.

This chart shows net changes in central bank gold reserves by country so far as of end of February, based on data from the World Gold Council.

Poland Leads Global Gold Buying in 2026

Poland is leading global gold accumulation in 2026, adding over 20 tonnes, more than any other central bank so far this year. This purchase is part of a broader multi-year plan to reach 700 tonnes, reflecting heightened security concerns on NATO’s eastern flank.

Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan follow closely behind, continuing a steady trend of gold accumulation among Central Asian economies.

Country Net Change in 2026 (Tonnes of Gold)
🇵🇱 Poland 20.23
🇺🇿 Uzbekistan 16.48
🇰🇿 Kazakhstan 6.51
🇲🇾 Malaysia 4.98
🇨🇿 Czechia 3.36
🇨🇳 China 2.18
🇰🇭 Cambodia 1.69
🇮🇩 Indonesia 1.51
🇷🇸 Serbia 0.99
🇵🇭 Philippines 0.46
🇸🇻 El Salvador 0.29
🇸🇬 Singapore 0.20
🇲🇹 Malta 0.12
🇲🇳 Mongolia 0.08
🇪🇬 Egypt 0.06
🇶🇦 Qatar 0.02
🇲🇽 Mexico -0.02
🇧🇾 Belarus -0.05
🇰🇬 Kyrgyzstan -1.07
🇧🇬 Bulgaria -1.88
🇹🇷 Turkey -8.08
🇷🇺 Russia -15.55

Diversification Away From Dollar Reserves

The freezing of roughly $300 billion in Russian central bank assets in 2022 marked a turning point for global reserve management.

In response, countries like China and several Central Asian economies have accelerated gold purchases, treating bullion as a reserve asset that sits outside the reach of foreign governments. Unlike foreign currency reserves, gold is not subject to foreign jurisdiction, making it attractive in a fragmented geopolitical landscape. Smaller buyers, such as Cambodia and Serbia, are also gradually increasing their allocations.

Why Russia and Turkey Are Selling Gold

On the other side of the ledger, Russia and Turkey are the largest net sellers of gold in 2026.

Russia’s gold sales point to mounting fiscal strain, as wartime spending and sanctions pressure government finances.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s reduction is driven by domestic policy, including efforts to stabilize the lira and manage local gold demand.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Mapped: Which Countries Hold the Most Gold Reserves? on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Ranked: The EU’s Richest Regions

2026-04-21 12:41:09

Ranked: The EU’s Richest Regions

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

  • Ireland’s Eastern and Midland region ranks first, with GDP per capita more than double the EU average.
  • Luxembourg and Southern Ireland also rank far above the norm, driven in part by multinational activity.
  • Capital hubs like Prague and Bucharest-Ilfov rank among the EU’s richest regions, highlighting how wealth clusters in major cities.

Ireland and Luxembourg dominate the top of this ranking, but some of the most surprising entries come from Central and Eastern Europe, where capital regions rival Western Europe’s wealthiest hubs.

Using data from Eurostat and visualized by DataPulse, this graphic ranks EU regions by GDP per capita in purchasing power standards (PPS), which adjusts for cost-of-living differences across countries.

The EU’s Top 30 Regions by GDP per Capita

The table below shows the EU’s top-performing regions by GDP per capita, measured in purchasing power standards (PPS):

Rank Region Country GDP per Capita (€) % of EU Avg
1 Eastern and Midland 🇮🇪 Ireland 107,200 268
2 Luxembourg 🇱🇺 Luxembourg 97,700 245
3 Southern 🇮🇪 Ireland 86,500 217
4 Hamburg 🇩🇪 Germany 78,300 196
5 Prague 🇨🇿 Czech Republic 76,600 192
6 Brussels 🇧🇪 Belgium 76,000 190
7 Bucharest - Ilfov 🇷🇴 Romania 75,000 188
8 Capital Region of Denmark 🇩🇰 Denmark 70,100 175
9 North Holland 🇳🇱 Netherlands 69,900 175
10 Upper Bavaria 🇩🇪 Germany 67,700 170
11 Budapest 🇭🇺 Hungary 67,200 168
12 Utrecht 🇳🇱 Netherlands 64,900 162
13 Bolzano - South Tyrol 🇮🇹 Italy 64,200 161
14 Île-de-France 🇫🇷 France 64,000 160
15 Warsaw 🇵🇱 Poland 62,800 157
16 Walloon Brabant 🇧🇪 Belgium 61,900 155
17 Stuttgart (district) 🇩🇪 Germany 61,300 153
18 Stockholm 🇸🇪 Sweden 61,100 153
19 Bratislava Region 🇸🇰 Slovakia 61,000 153
20 Darmstadt (district) 🇩🇪 Germany 59,200 148
21 Salzburg 🇦🇹 Austria 58,100 146
22 North Brabant 🇳🇱 Netherlands 55,400 139
23 Vienna 🇦🇹 Austria 54,600 137
24 Antwerp 🇧🇪 Belgium 54,100 135
25 Sostinės regionas 🇱🇹 Lithuania 53,000 133
26 Bremen (state) Bremen 🇩🇪 Germany 52,700 132
27 Lombardy 🇮🇹 Italy 52,700 132
28 Zagreb 🇭🇷 Croatia 52,500 131
29 Lower Saxony Braunschweig 🇩🇪 Germany 51,500 129
30 South Holland 🇳🇱 Netherlands 51,500 129
-- Average 🇪🇺 European Union 40,000 100

The top of the ranking is dominated by two familiar outliers: Ireland and Luxembourg.

Eastern and Midland (Ireland) leads the EU by a wide margin, while Southern Ireland and Luxembourg also rank far above the regional average. Notably, several Central and Eastern European capitals rank ahead of regions in much larger Western economies.

Why Ireland and Luxembourg Stand Out

At first glance, Ireland and Luxembourg appear to be runaway leaders. But part of that strength reflects the way multinational firms book profits in these economies.

In Ireland especially, the presence of major foreign companies can push GDP per capita far above what domestic consumption or household income alone would suggest. Economists often describe this gap as GDP distortion, where globally generated profits are recorded locally.

The Power of Capital Regions

Many of Europe’s wealthiest regions are centered around capital cities or major economic hubs. Prague, Brussels, Paris (Île-de-France), and Copenhagen all rank highly due to:

  • Concentration of government institutions
  • High-value service industries
  • Corporate headquarters and financial activity

These regions act as economic engines, attracting talent, investment, and infrastructure that boost productivity and output per person.

Eastern Europe’s Surprising Entries

Notably, Bucharest-Ilfov (Romania) and Budapest (Hungary) rank among the EU’s top regions, despite their countries having lower overall GDP per capita.

This creates a striking contrast: cities like Bucharest and Budapest rank among the EU’s richest regions, even though their countries rank much lower overall. Economic activity is concentrated in these capital hubs, where multinational firms and high-value services drive productivity well above national averages.

The broader takeaway is that national averages can hide where economic power is really concentrated. Across the EU, a relatively small group of capital cities, financial centers, and multinational hubs account for an outsized share of regional wealth.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

For more insights on Europe’s wealth distribution, check out Europe’s Richest Countries on the Voronoi app.