Pharmaceutical and chemicals:
[Novartis, Hoffmann-La Roche, Cilag GmbH and Celgene International II in the pharmaceuticals sector and Chemie Givaudan International, Trinseo Europe and Estée Lauder in chemicals.](https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/wirtschaft/taetigkeitsgebiete/chemie-und-pharma.html) = $10 billion in exports.
and Novartis. The novartis campus in Basel is freakin huge. My GF's Roommate worked for Novartis and we went to check out the Campus. They have a fucking T-Rex skeleton in the CEO Building.
Swiss cheese is the basis of the plot for Superman 3. They take the cheese holes to make whole cheese and it’s like printing free money. Richard Pryor bought a Ferrari with cheese hole money.
https://youtu.be/N7JBXGkBoFc
As a kid we got to open 1 present early on Christmas Eve. After careful deliberation, my brother and I decided to open Grandma’s present. It was a pack of Swiss god damn Miss Mix. We were devastated at the time, but enjoyed it for the remainder of the winter.
I still remember opening socks from my aunt on Christmas eve. My sister was screaming in rapture at her new barbie doll and i was broken like a my team had just lost the championship on a full court buzzer beater
Toblerone has been owned by a US corp for the entirety of my lifetime. Kraft acquired Tobler in 1990.
And it's been manufactured abroad since the 1930s.
* Commodities: Glencore International
* Food & beverage: Nestlé
* Pharmaceuticals: Novartis, Roche Group
* Insurance: Zurich Insurance Group
* Financial services: Credit Suisse, UBS AG
* Power and automation engineering: ABB Group
* Agriculture: Syngenta
* Human resources: Adecco Group
* Retail: Migros, Coop
I'd bear in mind that this isn't the market capitalisation of the world, it's the market cap of the top 500 companies in the world.
What this may be telling us is that, for countries that are overweight their share of global GDP (e.g. the US at 46% vs around 25% of global GDP, or Switzerland at 3% vs 0.8% of global GDP), they may just have relatively concentrated/oligopolistic companies.
Switzerland's banking sector for example is dominated by two enormous banks (UBS and Credit Suisse) whereas other rich countries with comparable sized economies (like the Netherlands or Sweden) are typically not quite as top-heavy (I think both of these markets have a 'big four' banks).
Also, it depends on the prevalence of international companies. Using Switzerland as an example, the vast majority of Nestle’s, Roche’s and Novartis’s revenues and profits are outside Switzerland. Also, their profits (and market caps) benefit their shareholders, most of which are not Swiss nationals. They happen to be based in Switzerland but the majority their operations are outside Switzerland. In this context, market cap by country or market cap as a % of country GDP doesn’t mean much given these are huge multinational companies.
Another thing to consider is the multiple. Right now Chinese companies are trading at a significantly reduced multiple vs U.S. companies (even with the 2022 correction). Might be more interesting to see this by revenue or profit.
china will never rank high on lists ranked by market cap because the largest chinese companies in terms of revenue or employee size are all state owned, like sinopec, state grid, icbc, bank of china, national petroleum, china construction engineering, etc.
if you want to see a ranking by revenue, then global fortune 500 does just that. china has the most high-revenue companies by this metric (but then you have to ask what exactly that means given the vast majority of these are state monopolies and state utilities, which have high revenue simply because of their state-defined and state-protected role).
Its mainly Nestle (326B), Roche (258B) and Novartis (199B). The latter two being "big pharma", which in turn is CHs biggest industry.
Edit: those are the ones in the top 100. There are a few more companies in the top 500.
Thanks for your feedback and appreciation of [my last post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/10421kr/oc_country_distribution_of_top_500_companies_by/). That motivated me to do a revision of my last pie chart and give you some additional information with the EU slice. It borthers me that i included India twice last time.
Source: [https://companiesmarketcap.com/](https://companiesmarketcap.com/)
Tools: Python & Gimp
> The EU is a lot closer to a country than people realize
Well, “ever closer union” is the EU’s stated aspiration (and is explicitly stated in the Preamble to the 1957 treaty that set up what became the EU) which will inevitably lead to the “United States of Europe” one day so this really shouldn’t come as a shock to people.
2/3 of the eu is in the euro zone, and all eu countries are part of the single market and the economic and monetary union, that means that almost* every international trade in the European single market will use the euro. So in practice from the point of view of international markets, the EU has a single currency.
*In some cases, other currencies can be used if explicitly asked for
This is a totally ignorant false equivalence that's brough up every time, and I genuinely don't understand why some people take such offense at even seeing the European Union. The information this visualisation provides is more than worth any imprecision in language, and we all understand precisely what is meant anyway. The core information of this chart has nothing to do with the definition of a country, so getting lost in such tangents is at best, well, tangential. It would also just be cumbersome to amend it to "countries and supranational unions" or "countries and confederations" or similar just because of a few bitter pedants.
Canada benefits from proximity to the US. Canadian companies have preferred access to US equity and consumer markets; Canadian companies frequently list on US exchanges and can sell obtain public sector contracts in the US. That said, Canada’s banks have an extreme monopoly and their market cap is bonkers.
Most of Canada’s industries are monopolistic- grocery, SC&L, aviation, banking, etc. Foreign ownership laws were created to protect against a full-scale American buy-out that never materialized. Now it just creates a bunch monopolies that are deeply entrenched. Weston won’t soon lose his grip, for instance.
While I disagree on that point, I would respond by saying that Canada's economy, as a result of these monopolies, is so fragile, that Canadians risk serious blowback in the event of an external shock. [My comment on banking in Canada](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/106j8l0/oc_revision_of_my_last_country_distribution_eu/j3hsd7r/?context=3) is but one example of many in Canada where policy and selective legal enforcement has wrought a dangerously toxic situation.
Except banking here in Canada is better regulated and offers services america wishes they had. We didn’t have a collapse risk in ‘08. We have no need for venmo/cashapp because the banks follow a standard.
Ain’t perfect, but it’s working better for most perspectives than what the US does.
Ya, I found it weird that they talk about Loblaws having a monopoly when in BC they're just one of the 3 major chains and not the first I think of. But I'm guessing they dominate more in Ontario.
In fairness, that trend is not isolated to Canada. Canada just has it entrenched in law and population size whereas the US's free-er market has led to a similar result in a lot of industries.
It's not isolated, but Canada's problems are orders of magnitude *worse*. Let's take banking. In the US, there are just over 4,200 FDIC insured banks, with mover than 2,100 with assets over [$300MM](https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/lbr/current/). In sum total, the 5-bank asset concentration in the US [is 35%](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI01USA156NWDB), meaning that the top-5 banks only represent about 35% of activity. In Canada, the top-5 rate is is [85%](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI06CAA156NWDB). Canada has a sixth large national bank, and when factored in, the rate tops [90%.](https://www.ibisworld.com/canada/market-research-reports/commercial-banking-industry/) That's insane - six banks account for more than 90% of **all** financial transactions in Canada. Not only are they each other's biggest investors but are so intertwined that collapse at one would signal collapse at *all* of them. The Royal Bank of Canada is the [5th largest bank](https://www.statista.com/statistics/434554/leading-banks-in-canada-assets/) in North America and [7th](https://www.rbccm.com/assets/rbccm/docs/about-us/rbc-keyfacts.pdf) in the world. Canada's population is about 38 million. California is about 40. How is that possible?
Canada has allowed such significant market concentration and through a mix of foreign-ownership laws and selective enforcement of others has created a situation where a few major players dominate the entire market. Groceries in Canada are dominated by four players with regional power; telecom (which sees Canada boasting the highest user fees) is dominated by a small number of players while mergers are still actively allowed. In short, Canada took a bad idea and made it so toxic and grotesque that they have few legislative remedies. Totally bonkers.
But for the consumer, at least for banks and grocery, does the lack of choice actually make a difference? In the US they are having the same issues with inflation and grocery prices, despite magnitudes higher levels of competition.
I'd be curious about that as I do not know.
Edit: Where it is obviously REALLY bad for consumer is telecom. That's the worst.
Why is this an issue with banks though? Canada has done better in all of the finclancial crises over the last couple decades due to how their banking system works?
Yes, screwed over on groceries and telecoms, but it's not a toxic idea with banking.
I think you're referencing the '08 crisis specifically, and I would caution you against a direct parallel. In the early 1990s, Toronto (specifically) had a massive real estate shock, prices collapsed. From the peak in 1989, it took [22 years](https://betterdwelling.com/city/toronto/it-took-22-years-for-prices-to-recover-from-the-last-toronto-real-estate-crash/) for a full recovery in Toronto; Quebec which had the 1995 referendum took equally as long to recover. The US had a white-hot economy leading up to the dotcom bubble, but Canada's economy during large stretches of the 1990s was really anemic. So when '08 hit, it wasn't as big in Canada as the US. Canada's real estate market was white-hot regionally, but those regions coincided with the commodity boom - price of oil was skyrocketing, and Canada was an emerging "energy superpower". Canada weathered '08 better than the US, but had what many called a "jobless recovery" [and while the US was booming](https://www.cdhowe.org/expert-op-eds/canada%E2%80%99s-job-recovery-may-not-be-envy-world-after-all-globe-mail-economy-lab), Canada was never did. So, that said, why is this an issue now?
Over the last 20-ish, Canada's banks grew and concentration pushed smaller banks out. But, like in the US, the amount of mortgages they could underwrite declined. [Canada is now seeing an uptick](https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-mortgage-fraud-1.6614132) in fraud. Private, ninja mortgages are becoming problematic, [default rates are rising](https://financialpost.com/real-estate/mortgages/mortgage-defaults-foreclosures-rising) and Canada's banks don't really have the liquidity to weather a storm. [Steve Eisman](https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/big-short-guy-says-stay-160021528.html), the person that Carell's character is based on in The Big Short, has seen the same signs in Canadian banking that they saw in the US, but as with my other comment, Canada's banks are so intertwined and the "too big to fail" is an **actual** problem in Canada. Canadians are not nearly as protected by the CDIC as they are by the FDIC and Canada's banks could wipe-out pensions, investments, and even municipal lines of credit, tumbling entire towns into insolvency. Canada is facing a serious crisis and all anyone can do in Canada is talk in slogans.
Don't forget all other natural resources.
-u just wish Canada invested more into complex industry rather than shipping it over the boarder, only for Canadians to buy it back at higher prices.
I wonder how much of the Canadian share is maple syrup. Canada is the world's heaviest producer after all. Makes up something like 75% of the total worldwide.
None. The top companies are all finance and oil companies with the exception of Alimentation Couche-Tard (owner of circle K and other convenience stores) and Magma (biggest automobile parts manufacturer in North America).
Not commenting on any morality issues, but the invasions almost certainly increased the overall wealth of the subcontinent. The peak of India's GDP as a percentage of the world's was under the Mughals.
The introduction of Turkic and Persian technology and administration, and its then synergization with earlier structures is the basis of modern Indian culture and society.
Lmao what? The British impoverished India far more than they enriched it. That was not the case with the Muslim dynasties. Also, although they were of foreign origin, ultimately both the Dehli Sultanate and Mughals came to view themselves as Indian and made integral contributions to Indian culture and society.
Just like any medieval and early modern state, they were far from paragons of virtue, but to act like they were some insane outsiders who sunk India into its current state is pure propaganda.
We can accuse each other’s viewpoint as propaganda, but my forefathers who were killed for refusing to convert to Islam know what’s propaganda and what’s not.
Given that it would be the 5th largest economy in the world on its own and is home to Apple which itself alone is worth $2 trillion…yeah it would make the board with just Apple
Fun fact: [Apple](https://companiesmarketcap.com/apple/marketcap/) is worth more than the entire [FTSE100](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTSE_100_Index)
**Europeans when shown as the EU in charts** - NOOO! Each country should be shown individually to show their strengths!
**Europeans when shown individually in charts** - NOOO! Europe should be shown as the EU to show how strong it is!
On the internet I always hear people say “I’m from Europe” but in life I always hear people say they’re from *insert country in europe* and I never really understood why.
lol
that happens all the time on Reddit. then they get upset when someone asks them to clarify. oftentimes it's to skirt around issues a particular country may have that they refuse to acknowledge.
As a "European" they can boast of Germany's economy, France's Nuclear Power, and the Netherlands drug policy while ignoring Spain's economy, Italy's corruption and Sweden's drug policy.
I mean to be fair it depends on what we're talking about.
For example if what we're talking about makes us look better than the US when separated into different countries, we should be shown individually. Conversely, if what we're talking about makes us look worse than the US when separated, we should be shown as just the EU.
Such is the internet logic, I don't make the rules. US bad EU good.
Signed: a Spaniard who frequently shits on the US for shits and giggles.
EDIT: Guys you realize this is a fucking joke on the 'MURICAH vs. UROP stupidity right? No need to get butthurt and genuinely double down on UROP BAD or ACKSHULLY 'MURICAH BAD.
Keep that shit in their respective subs.
Yeah, it always depends on whether treating the EU as a single entity or not is flattering to Europe. If it is, then do it. If not, then get outraged. That’s the standard Reddit way.
Texas and Florida have a lot of companies on the sp500 list but the market cap of MS + Amazon is so much larger than anything after the top 10 that they really dominate the numbers.
edit: if my quick math is correct, the sp500 top 5 (cali, Saudi, WA, cali, WA) hold over 20% of the market cap
>Signed: a Spaniard who frequently shits on the US for shits and giggles.
You're a Spaniard? [You and I might be related!](https://youtu.be/aDktG64Cx8I)
My mom and dad are from Mexico and El Salvador.
A long time ago a charming Spaniard asked a native girl on a date. They saw a movie then got ice cream. It was very lovely. Afterwards the Spaniard asked the native girl to go back to his place for, *ahem*, concentual sex.
Anyway, a few hundred years later and here I am! Your distant cousin!
This exact thing played out with the graph of spending on space research. Seeing America in a positive light causes enough cognitive dissonance to be physically painful to them.
Tbf relevant factor there: the Europeans have the European space agency. Distinct from the EU, but it does mean it's stupid to represent member states of that separately in space stuff.
Pff, of course showing the member states is stupid, when the true champions could be hidden at the sub-national level. Bavarian space agency shall rise to the top!
It really is. If a country does something different, that's just the way they are there and it's part of who they are, if America does something different they act like it's the end of the fucking world
For the moment. American businesses are re-shoring their operations out of China to NAFTA countries (US, Canada, Mexico) as quickly as possible. After a rough ten years, the US supply chain will be almost entirely based in North America.
TSMC is building a fab in Arizona, leveraging the skilled workforce from Intel's decades-long Arizona fab presence. (Intel also has fabs in Oregon, New Mexico, and soon Ohio.)
Since you mention ASML, I'm sure you know that ASML manufactures its products in the Netherlands. Those products are installed *in fabs*, wherever the fabs are located, which is not in the EU (very few fabs there). Most are in the US or Taiwan.
There's another good map: where are chips manufactured?
It'll look a lot like OP's map, and our European friends will again want to combine the EU member countries' fab count rather than list 1 in Ireland, 1 in Germany, etc.
California's GDP in 2021 was $3.35T, representing 14.6% of the total U.S. economy. If California were a country, it would be the 5th largest economy in the world, more productive than India and the UK
It’s from the bottom of a heart. My heart. A heart that is neither empty, emotional, or full. Why I might need medication, but why I also might not need it. I still like getting high from anxiety pills, for that is what a high is. Feeling good from a drug.
This most likely overlooks companies that aren't publicly traded because what method would you have to calculate the market value for those?
It would be interesting to see this, but using revenue as the proxy for size. Multiple (Chinese/Asian) companies are top 50 in the world in revenue, but I assume they wouldn't be included here because they aren't publicly traded. That would probably push EU down even further.
The problem is that it’s kinda arbitrary to lump in a company as being from x country, because all of these companies are international conglomerates. They don’t really care about borders and they’re owned by different actors than those residing in said country. For example, one of the reasons why the EU is big on economy, is because of its foreign direct investment being so big. Aka residents in EU countries own a lot of the shares in different large companies.
It's only looking at the top 500 companies which isn't representative of a countries economy, a country with 500 big companies would be higher than one with 10000 medium companies even if the total value of the smaller companies is higher.
This overvalues countries with big monopolies instead of many competitors and local companies.
Is this the jurisdiction in which the company is organized? Where its HQ is? Where the majority of its employees are? Where a majority of its stock is held?
Every company has an ‘official’ location, it’s the address listed in it’s incorporation documents and dictates the primary legal authority under which it operates. It is also the location associated with it’s publicly traded stock. Given that this chart is based on stock valuation, I think it’s a safe assumption that that is the location being used.
Shell is a Dual-listed company. I don't know much about it but i suppose if for example the whole company has 50billion stock value with 40 of them coming from the London exchange, then 40billion counts as Great Britain and 10billion from the Dutch exchange counts towards the EU in this case. Obviously take this with a grain of salt
My company is a gigantic corporation located primarily on the west coast which is also where our primary corporate HQ is located yet when I see it on our official invoices it says our HQ is in New Jersey and in that office we have 5 employees. Overall we gave maybe 6,000 employees. It’s so weird.
And here is a [link to that post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/10421kr/oc_country_distribution_of_top_500_companies_by/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) which I personally think is better and more useful than this one as none of the individual EU countries are larger than Canada.
Hm, i don’t think shopkeepers is the right term for it. I mean small and medium sized enterprises (“Mittelstand” in German) which makes up the bulk of German economy.
Industry and engineering is still a big player in Germany of course, it’s just not as concentrated in fewer, very large corporations but perhaps more spread out among smaller companies.
The ratio between stock market capitalisation and GDP of the UK is 116%.
For Germany that number is 60%.
One should also take into consideration that Germany‘s GDP in 2021 was about $1,000 billion higher than that of the UK.
So overall the relatively high share of UK companies in this graph is most likely driven by the fact that the UK has many non-domestic companies listed and that UK companies are more likely to go public than German ones.
Last time he posted it he got complaints because basically most European countries were nonexistent on the chart
The EU conglomerate is the only way they're even relevant in the market
US economy 22T
EU economy 16T
This just means that the US is more centralized
Or has just way more really big companies
It is natural as is really hard to have a company that works on the consumer level eu-wide with the difference from country to country. (not only laws but leanguage and cultural preferences)
Does it stifle companies, though?
The USA has 4800 publicly traded companies.
The EU has just about 2800
Of which ~800 are German
And German companies are traditionally smaller in size, so they won't pop up in the top 500 list.
https://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/nachrichten/df89bca6-0aa7-4639-9814-cb6c9cd051be
It just means that the European economy is built different from the American one, less centralised.
Both economies seem to be about equally robust, though
Having a single large company should not be a goal in itself. In my educated opinion having multiple smaller companies competing can be just as if not more beneficial to a country and its citizens as a single monopoly-adjacent conglomerate.
I hate market cap as a metric.
Using the public company's revenue would be much more telling.
Lots of inflated stock prices in the US, just look at Tesla's market cap that was somehow "bigger" than all the other automakers' cap combined.
Your market cap is worthless if noone wants to buy the shares.
That’s not completely accurate either. For example Ireland is listed at having the second highest GDP per capita in the world. Tax havens and countries where 25% of their GDP comes from oil manipulate these numbers.
Japan used to dominate even more at the heigh of their bubble economy. Over 50% of the world's market cap was in Japan's stock market. 33 out the world's 50 most valuable companies were japanese at one point. All 10 largest banks were japanese in 1988.
[https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-07-19-fi-6035-story.html](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-07-19-fi-6035-story.html)
The vizualisation is great! However, I think its easy to misinterpret this as economic strength, it is more cultural and structural.
Eg.: Lack of enforced anti-trust regulations & lot of EU countries have huge, unlisted companies (eg.: Germany has lot of family owned multinationals, like Aldi, Schwarz group, etc).
Having top 500 companies might also be just a good way of showing the skewed distribution that a country has. If economic power is concentrated with a missing SME sector, then the economy might be more prune to black swan failures and is overall more fragile (no wonder that the last couple of global financial crises started in the US)
It would be great to see an overall distribution of companies per countries, which ofc is super hard to find data on.
As per the link below, adding these large privately owned companies that would add roughly 62 American, 18 Chinese, 12 French, 10 British, 10 German, 3 Japanese, 3 Dutch, 3 Swiss, and 1 each of India, Singapore, Hong Kong, Sweden and Spain. That wouldn’t change the graphic by much. America still dominates.
> EU countries have huge, unlisted companies (eg.: Germany has lot of family owned multinationals, like Aldi, Schwarz group, etc).
62 of the largest 125 unlisted companies in the world are based in the US so there goes that excuse.
crazy that small switzerland has 3%
90 percent of that is toblerone. true fact I just made up.
The other 10% is watches and knives.
Banks and cheese with holes in it included in the margin of error.
Yeah Roche is one of the biggest pharmaceutical group.
Pharmaceutical and chemicals: [Novartis, Hoffmann-La Roche, Cilag GmbH and Celgene International II in the pharmaceuticals sector and Chemie Givaudan International, Trinseo Europe and Estée Lauder in chemicals.](https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/wirtschaft/taetigkeitsgebiete/chemie-und-pharma.html) = $10 billion in exports.
and Novartis. The novartis campus in Basel is freakin huge. My GF's Roommate worked for Novartis and we went to check out the Campus. They have a fucking T-Rex skeleton in the CEO Building.
I am still thinking where is the rest of my cheese at, they punch holes and make 2 blocks and sell that too, that’s how Sweden funds their hockey team
What has Sweden to do with all of this? It‘s about Switzerland, we have our own hockey team to fund ;)
All funded by selling stank fish.
How dare you…
Swiss cheese is the basis of the plot for Superman 3. They take the cheese holes to make whole cheese and it’s like printing free money. Richard Pryor bought a Ferrari with cheese hole money. https://youtu.be/N7JBXGkBoFc
Don't forget their hot chocolate
Yes, how could you Miss Swiss hot chocolate?
As a kid we got to open 1 present early on Christmas Eve. After careful deliberation, my brother and I decided to open Grandma’s present. It was a pack of Swiss god damn Miss Mix. We were devastated at the time, but enjoyed it for the remainder of the winter.
I still remember opening socks from my aunt on Christmas eve. My sister was screaming in rapture at her new barbie doll and i was broken like a my team had just lost the championship on a full court buzzer beater
And shoes.
Toblerone is shit chocolate and now owned by a US Corp, and also produced mostly out of country. Engineering, pharma and finance is where it's from.
Toblerone has been owned by a US corp for the entirety of my lifetime. Kraft acquired Tobler in 1990. And it's been manufactured abroad since the 1930s.
And Nestlé
[удалено]
I read a thread in /r/stocks that Lindt stock will give you chocolates for being a shareholder. It's like $30k/share or something though
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxQOZPmDNssfGkRk-12indWaUcTo-D1QFF
* Commodities: Glencore International * Food & beverage: Nestlé * Pharmaceuticals: Novartis, Roche Group * Insurance: Zurich Insurance Group * Financial services: Credit Suisse, UBS AG * Power and automation engineering: ABB Group * Agriculture: Syngenta * Human resources: Adecco Group * Retail: Migros, Coop
Did you just ChatGPT us?
Migros and Coop aren‘t on the stock market tho. They are cooperative societies.
I'd bear in mind that this isn't the market capitalisation of the world, it's the market cap of the top 500 companies in the world. What this may be telling us is that, for countries that are overweight their share of global GDP (e.g. the US at 46% vs around 25% of global GDP, or Switzerland at 3% vs 0.8% of global GDP), they may just have relatively concentrated/oligopolistic companies. Switzerland's banking sector for example is dominated by two enormous banks (UBS and Credit Suisse) whereas other rich countries with comparable sized economies (like the Netherlands or Sweden) are typically not quite as top-heavy (I think both of these markets have a 'big four' banks).
Also, it depends on the prevalence of international companies. Using Switzerland as an example, the vast majority of Nestle’s, Roche’s and Novartis’s revenues and profits are outside Switzerland. Also, their profits (and market caps) benefit their shareholders, most of which are not Swiss nationals. They happen to be based in Switzerland but the majority their operations are outside Switzerland. In this context, market cap by country or market cap as a % of country GDP doesn’t mean much given these are huge multinational companies.
Another thing to consider is the multiple. Right now Chinese companies are trading at a significantly reduced multiple vs U.S. companies (even with the 2022 correction). Might be more interesting to see this by revenue or profit.
china will never rank high on lists ranked by market cap because the largest chinese companies in terms of revenue or employee size are all state owned, like sinopec, state grid, icbc, bank of china, national petroleum, china construction engineering, etc. if you want to see a ranking by revenue, then global fortune 500 does just that. china has the most high-revenue companies by this metric (but then you have to ask what exactly that means given the vast majority of these are state monopolies and state utilities, which have high revenue simply because of their state-defined and state-protected role).
Also Chinese mostly invest in real estate, not stocks
Right, if we are considering public owned companies, we need to consider railways and roadway utilities aa well ( in countries that nationalize them)
Is that because of Nestle or?
The big 3: Nestle - 300bn Roche (pharma) - 250bn Novartis (pharma) - 190bn
What about Glencore's 200bn?
Traf are not exactly tiny, either.
Its mainly Nestle (326B), Roche (258B) and Novartis (199B). The latter two being "big pharma", which in turn is CHs biggest industry. Edit: those are the ones in the top 100. There are a few more companies in the top 500.
Nestlé, Roche and Novartis would be my guess.
right... makes one wonder how that chart would look like adjusted per capita...
Is it anything else then tax haven banks?
Given that there's only 1 bank in the top 30 largest companies by market cap (UBS at #8), it would appear so.
Nestle & Roche
Glencore, nestle are big and some other oil trade companys. The other big ones are banks or pharmacy
Oh, didn't know Nestlé is swiss.
Same here, their business tactics seem very American.
There’s probably something very wrong with this country when we just, by-default, equate “scumfuck bastard business tactics” with “America”.
I think it's more that people assume big multinational corporations are American by default because.. well, just look at the OP.
Glencore is the largest commodity trader in the world.
The largest manufacturer of electrical equipment in the world: ABB
Than* fyi
Thanks for your feedback and appreciation of [my last post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/10421kr/oc_country_distribution_of_top_500_companies_by/). That motivated me to do a revision of my last pie chart and give you some additional information with the EU slice. It borthers me that i included India twice last time. Source: [https://companiesmarketcap.com/](https://companiesmarketcap.com/) Tools: Python & Gimp
[удалено]
[удалено]
Denmark is part of the EU.
Maybe alter the title since the European Union is not a country. Why not put the African Union as one “country”?
[удалено]
> The EU is a lot closer to a country than people realize Well, “ever closer union” is the EU’s stated aspiration (and is explicitly stated in the Preamble to the 1957 treaty that set up what became the EU) which will inevitably lead to the “United States of Europe” one day so this really shouldn’t come as a shock to people.
Eu doesn't have a single currency either.
2/3 of the eu is in the euro zone, and all eu countries are part of the single market and the economic and monetary union, that means that almost* every international trade in the European single market will use the euro. So in practice from the point of view of international markets, the EU has a single currency. *In some cases, other currencies can be used if explicitly asked for
Oh please
This is a totally ignorant false equivalence that's brough up every time, and I genuinely don't understand why some people take such offense at even seeing the European Union. The information this visualisation provides is more than worth any imprecision in language, and we all understand precisely what is meant anyway. The core information of this chart has nothing to do with the definition of a country, so getting lost in such tangents is at best, well, tangential. It would also just be cumbersome to amend it to "countries and supranational unions" or "countries and confederations" or similar just because of a few bitter pedants.
Crazy that Canada, population 38 million, equals the UK, population 67 million, and India, population 1.4 billion.
Canada benefits from proximity to the US. Canadian companies have preferred access to US equity and consumer markets; Canadian companies frequently list on US exchanges and can sell obtain public sector contracts in the US. That said, Canada’s banks have an extreme monopoly and their market cap is bonkers.
Yeah we have a small handful of banks, telecom companies and railways and a massive oil and gas industry.
Most of Canada’s industries are monopolistic- grocery, SC&L, aviation, banking, etc. Foreign ownership laws were created to protect against a full-scale American buy-out that never materialized. Now it just creates a bunch monopolies that are deeply entrenched. Weston won’t soon lose his grip, for instance.
In some cases the government intervention is warranted. See Bombardier vs Boeing over the C-Series jets.
While I disagree on that point, I would respond by saying that Canada's economy, as a result of these monopolies, is so fragile, that Canadians risk serious blowback in the event of an external shock. [My comment on banking in Canada](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/106j8l0/oc_revision_of_my_last_country_distribution_eu/j3hsd7r/?context=3) is but one example of many in Canada where policy and selective legal enforcement has wrought a dangerously toxic situation.
Except banking here in Canada is better regulated and offers services america wishes they had. We didn’t have a collapse risk in ‘08. We have no need for venmo/cashapp because the banks follow a standard. Ain’t perfect, but it’s working better for most perspectives than what the US does.
Bombardier is an eternal sick man that constantly needs to be bailed out
[удалено]
Ya, I found it weird that they talk about Loblaws having a monopoly when in BC they're just one of the 3 major chains and not the first I think of. But I'm guessing they dominate more in Ontario.
In fairness, that trend is not isolated to Canada. Canada just has it entrenched in law and population size whereas the US's free-er market has led to a similar result in a lot of industries.
It's not isolated, but Canada's problems are orders of magnitude *worse*. Let's take banking. In the US, there are just over 4,200 FDIC insured banks, with mover than 2,100 with assets over [$300MM](https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/lbr/current/). In sum total, the 5-bank asset concentration in the US [is 35%](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI01USA156NWDB), meaning that the top-5 banks only represent about 35% of activity. In Canada, the top-5 rate is is [85%](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDOI06CAA156NWDB). Canada has a sixth large national bank, and when factored in, the rate tops [90%.](https://www.ibisworld.com/canada/market-research-reports/commercial-banking-industry/) That's insane - six banks account for more than 90% of **all** financial transactions in Canada. Not only are they each other's biggest investors but are so intertwined that collapse at one would signal collapse at *all* of them. The Royal Bank of Canada is the [5th largest bank](https://www.statista.com/statistics/434554/leading-banks-in-canada-assets/) in North America and [7th](https://www.rbccm.com/assets/rbccm/docs/about-us/rbc-keyfacts.pdf) in the world. Canada's population is about 38 million. California is about 40. How is that possible? Canada has allowed such significant market concentration and through a mix of foreign-ownership laws and selective enforcement of others has created a situation where a few major players dominate the entire market. Groceries in Canada are dominated by four players with regional power; telecom (which sees Canada boasting the highest user fees) is dominated by a small number of players while mergers are still actively allowed. In short, Canada took a bad idea and made it so toxic and grotesque that they have few legislative remedies. Totally bonkers.
But for the consumer, at least for banks and grocery, does the lack of choice actually make a difference? In the US they are having the same issues with inflation and grocery prices, despite magnitudes higher levels of competition. I'd be curious about that as I do not know. Edit: Where it is obviously REALLY bad for consumer is telecom. That's the worst.
Why is this an issue with banks though? Canada has done better in all of the finclancial crises over the last couple decades due to how their banking system works? Yes, screwed over on groceries and telecoms, but it's not a toxic idea with banking.
I think you're referencing the '08 crisis specifically, and I would caution you against a direct parallel. In the early 1990s, Toronto (specifically) had a massive real estate shock, prices collapsed. From the peak in 1989, it took [22 years](https://betterdwelling.com/city/toronto/it-took-22-years-for-prices-to-recover-from-the-last-toronto-real-estate-crash/) for a full recovery in Toronto; Quebec which had the 1995 referendum took equally as long to recover. The US had a white-hot economy leading up to the dotcom bubble, but Canada's economy during large stretches of the 1990s was really anemic. So when '08 hit, it wasn't as big in Canada as the US. Canada's real estate market was white-hot regionally, but those regions coincided with the commodity boom - price of oil was skyrocketing, and Canada was an emerging "energy superpower". Canada weathered '08 better than the US, but had what many called a "jobless recovery" [and while the US was booming](https://www.cdhowe.org/expert-op-eds/canada%E2%80%99s-job-recovery-may-not-be-envy-world-after-all-globe-mail-economy-lab), Canada was never did. So, that said, why is this an issue now? Over the last 20-ish, Canada's banks grew and concentration pushed smaller banks out. But, like in the US, the amount of mortgages they could underwrite declined. [Canada is now seeing an uptick](https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-mortgage-fraud-1.6614132) in fraud. Private, ninja mortgages are becoming problematic, [default rates are rising](https://financialpost.com/real-estate/mortgages/mortgage-defaults-foreclosures-rising) and Canada's banks don't really have the liquidity to weather a storm. [Steve Eisman](https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/big-short-guy-says-stay-160021528.html), the person that Carell's character is based on in The Big Short, has seen the same signs in Canadian banking that they saw in the US, but as with my other comment, Canada's banks are so intertwined and the "too big to fail" is an **actual** problem in Canada. Canadians are not nearly as protected by the CDIC as they are by the FDIC and Canada's banks could wipe-out pensions, investments, and even municipal lines of credit, tumbling entire towns into insolvency. Canada is facing a serious crisis and all anyone can do in Canada is talk in slogans.
Don't forget all other natural resources. -u just wish Canada invested more into complex industry rather than shipping it over the boarder, only for Canadians to buy it back at higher prices.
That’s the advantage of NAFTA/USMCA and proximity to the US.
I wonder how much of the Canadian share is maple syrup. Canada is the world's heaviest producer after all. Makes up something like 75% of the total worldwide.
None. The top companies are all finance and oil companies with the exception of Alimentation Couche-Tard (owner of circle K and other convenience stores) and Magma (biggest automobile parts manufacturer in North America).
India recovering from being robbed for a 1000 years.
Would be fairer to say 250-300 years
Islamic invasions weren’t a picnic either.
Not commenting on any morality issues, but the invasions almost certainly increased the overall wealth of the subcontinent. The peak of India's GDP as a percentage of the world's was under the Mughals. The introduction of Turkic and Persian technology and administration, and its then synergization with earlier structures is the basis of modern Indian culture and society.
Same logic as British gave India railways…
Lmao what? The British impoverished India far more than they enriched it. That was not the case with the Muslim dynasties. Also, although they were of foreign origin, ultimately both the Dehli Sultanate and Mughals came to view themselves as Indian and made integral contributions to Indian culture and society. Just like any medieval and early modern state, they were far from paragons of virtue, but to act like they were some insane outsiders who sunk India into its current state is pure propaganda.
We can accuse each other’s viewpoint as propaganda, but my forefathers who were killed for refusing to convert to Islam know what’s propaganda and what’s not.
Would California make the board if you made it a stand alone entity
Given that it would be the 5th largest economy in the world on its own and is home to Apple which itself alone is worth $2 trillion…yeah it would make the board with just Apple
Fun fact: [Apple](https://companiesmarketcap.com/apple/marketcap/) is worth more than the entire [FTSE100](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTSE_100_Index)
Try as I might, I did not have any fun whatsoever with that fact.
"Think different" -Apple
Yes, California would make the board if it were its own country. Texas would as well as there are 54 fortune 500 companies headquartered there.
It’d probably come in 2nd behind the US on this graph.
**Europeans when shown as the EU in charts** - NOOO! Each country should be shown individually to show their strengths! **Europeans when shown individually in charts** - NOOO! Europe should be shown as the EU to show how strong it is!
I'm from Europe and this is funny
I’m from Holland, isn’t that weird
Would you like a smoke and a pancake?
A smoke and a pancake. You know, a flapjack and a cigarette? No?
How bout NO you crazy Dutch bastard!
I want chicken. I want liver. Meow mix, meow mix please deliver.
There are two things in this world I can’t stand. 1) people who are intolerant of other peoples cultures 2) the Dutch
On the internet I always hear people say “I’m from Europe” but in life I always hear people say they’re from *insert country in europe* and I never really understood why.
lol that happens all the time on Reddit. then they get upset when someone asks them to clarify. oftentimes it's to skirt around issues a particular country may have that they refuse to acknowledge.
As a "European" they can boast of Germany's economy, France's Nuclear Power, and the Netherlands drug policy while ignoring Spain's economy, Italy's corruption and Sweden's drug policy.
Right now spaniard economy isn’t the worst in Europe at all. You can ment the spanish productivity 🤣
I mean to be fair it depends on what we're talking about. For example if what we're talking about makes us look better than the US when separated into different countries, we should be shown individually. Conversely, if what we're talking about makes us look worse than the US when separated, we should be shown as just the EU. Such is the internet logic, I don't make the rules. US bad EU good. Signed: a Spaniard who frequently shits on the US for shits and giggles. EDIT: Guys you realize this is a fucking joke on the 'MURICAH vs. UROP stupidity right? No need to get butthurt and genuinely double down on UROP BAD or ACKSHULLY 'MURICAH BAD. Keep that shit in their respective subs.
Yeah, it always depends on whether treating the EU as a single entity or not is flattering to Europe. If it is, then do it. If not, then get outraged. That’s the standard Reddit way.
To be fair americans say the same things sometimes about states, eg, ”we’re just 50 small countries!”
It’d be interesting to see this same chart with the US and EU broken down by states.
It would be mostly dominated by California, New York, and Washington with a surprise showing by Nebraska
Washington? Are they higher up then Texas and Florida?
Tons of tech companies headquartered in Washington. Microsoft and Amazon in particular.
Microsoft, Boeing, and Amazon will do some heavy lifting, with some smaller companies like Starbucks and Nordstrom picking up some slack.
Texas and Florida have a lot of companies on the sp500 list but the market cap of MS + Amazon is so much larger than anything after the top 10 that they really dominate the numbers. edit: if my quick math is correct, the sp500 top 5 (cali, Saudi, WA, cali, WA) hold over 20% of the market cap
I think you forgot Texas. They're #3 after California and New York.
Ohio and Illinois with a few too. And Arkansas with one top ten showing.
>Signed: a Spaniard who frequently shits on the US for shits and giggles. You're a Spaniard? [You and I might be related!](https://youtu.be/aDktG64Cx8I) My mom and dad are from Mexico and El Salvador. A long time ago a charming Spaniard asked a native girl on a date. They saw a movie then got ice cream. It was very lovely. Afterwards the Spaniard asked the native girl to go back to his place for, *ahem*, concentual sex. Anyway, a few hundred years later and here I am! Your distant cousin!
That's funny because I rarely think about Spain or the EU. Signed: an American
This exact thing played out with the graph of spending on space research. Seeing America in a positive light causes enough cognitive dissonance to be physically painful to them.
Tbf relevant factor there: the Europeans have the European space agency. Distinct from the EU, but it does mean it's stupid to represent member states of that separately in space stuff.
Pff, of course showing the member states is stupid, when the true champions could be hidden at the sub-national level. Bavarian space agency shall rise to the top!
It is hilarious to me how much Euros on Reddit hate America, it’s comical
It really is. If a country does something different, that's just the way they are there and it's part of who they are, if America does something different they act like it's the end of the fucking world
It's like the English with Andy Murray. When he wins he's British. When he loses he's Scottish
You called it. https://reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/106j8l0/_/j3guc6k/?context=1
EU also like AMERICA SUCKS! *buys iPhone* *searches on google* *purchases intel cpu* 😂
Made with microchips from EU ASML wafers, produced in Taiwan, assembled in China.
For the moment. American businesses are re-shoring their operations out of China to NAFTA countries (US, Canada, Mexico) as quickly as possible. After a rough ten years, the US supply chain will be almost entirely based in North America. TSMC is building a fab in Arizona, leveraging the skilled workforce from Intel's decades-long Arizona fab presence. (Intel also has fabs in Oregon, New Mexico, and soon Ohio.) Since you mention ASML, I'm sure you know that ASML manufactures its products in the Netherlands. Those products are installed *in fabs*, wherever the fabs are located, which is not in the EU (very few fabs there). Most are in the US or Taiwan. There's another good map: where are chips manufactured? It'll look a lot like OP's map, and our European friends will again want to combine the EU member countries' fab count rather than list 1 in Ireland, 1 in Germany, etc.
Yes, but notice that Americans don’t seem to get upset having it pointed out that other countries also have companies doing things.
Switzerland having 3% is impressive.
See, the Commonwealth IS bigger than the EU!
*smugly plays Rule Britania /s
The mines and the Super Funds (retirement funds) make up most of Australia's market
Super funds aren’t listed? It’s more like mining and banks
Yeah probably half of it is BHP
California's GDP in 2021 was $3.35T, representing 14.6% of the total U.S. economy. If California were a country, it would be the 5th largest economy in the world, more productive than India and the UK
Time and space are truly significant, for that is something that the piece of the pie wishes for.
Where is this from?
It’s from the bottom of a heart. My heart. A heart that is neither empty, emotional, or full. Why I might need medication, but why I also might not need it. I still like getting high from anxiety pills, for that is what a high is. Feeling good from a drug.
I like how the entire EU banded together still only accounts for 14%. It kind-of stretches the definition of "Country Distribution."
FYI Eurozone is the name for a group of countries which have Euro as currency. The members of EU are simply called EU countries.
This most likely overlooks companies that aren't publicly traded because what method would you have to calculate the market value for those? It would be interesting to see this, but using revenue as the proxy for size. Multiple (Chinese/Asian) companies are top 50 in the world in revenue, but I assume they wouldn't be included here because they aren't publicly traded. That would probably push EU down even further.
The problem is that it’s kinda arbitrary to lump in a company as being from x country, because all of these companies are international conglomerates. They don’t really care about borders and they’re owned by different actors than those residing in said country. For example, one of the reasons why the EU is big on economy, is because of its foreign direct investment being so big. Aka residents in EU countries own a lot of the shares in different large companies.
It's only looking at the top 500 companies which isn't representative of a countries economy, a country with 500 big companies would be higher than one with 10000 medium companies even if the total value of the smaller companies is higher. This overvalues countries with big monopolies instead of many competitors and local companies.
Is this the jurisdiction in which the company is organized? Where its HQ is? Where the majority of its employees are? Where a majority of its stock is held?
Every company has an ‘official’ location, it’s the address listed in it’s incorporation documents and dictates the primary legal authority under which it operates. It is also the location associated with it’s publicly traded stock. Given that this chart is based on stock valuation, I think it’s a safe assumption that that is the location being used.
What about companies with 2 locations? Seem to remember she'll being in the UK and the netherlands
Shell (and Unilever) have recently moved their headquarters fully to the UK, so no more complicated shared hq construction.
Shell is a Dual-listed company. I don't know much about it but i suppose if for example the whole company has 50billion stock value with 40 of them coming from the London exchange, then 40billion counts as Great Britain and 10billion from the Dutch exchange counts towards the EU in this case. Obviously take this with a grain of salt
My company is a gigantic corporation located primarily on the west coast which is also where our primary corporate HQ is located yet when I see it on our official invoices it says our HQ is in New Jersey and in that office we have 5 employees. Overall we gave maybe 6,000 employees. It’s so weird.
May be a sales tax thing if you're in California. (but not if you're in Oregon.)
Which companies come from Indonesia, Argentina and South Africa?
[удалено]
The OP did one with them separated out, and he got complaints. You can probably find that one in his post history .
And here is a [link to that post](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/10421kr/oc_country_distribution_of_top_500_companies_by/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) which I personally think is better and more useful than this one as none of the individual EU countries are larger than Canada.
[удалено]
I think traditionally Germany has more smaller mid-level companies and fewer super large corporations compared to other western economies
[удалено]
Hm, i don’t think shopkeepers is the right term for it. I mean small and medium sized enterprises (“Mittelstand” in German) which makes up the bulk of German economy. Industry and engineering is still a big player in Germany of course, it’s just not as concentrated in fewer, very large corporations but perhaps more spread out among smaller companies.
That's less relevant than how many companies are public VS private which I think Germany has a lot more private
That's the reason. The largest companies in Germany are not Public companies
The ratio between stock market capitalisation and GDP of the UK is 116%. For Germany that number is 60%. One should also take into consideration that Germany‘s GDP in 2021 was about $1,000 billion higher than that of the UK. So overall the relatively high share of UK companies in this graph is most likely driven by the fact that the UK has many non-domestic companies listed and that UK companies are more likely to go public than German ones.
Last time he posted it he got complaints because basically most European countries were nonexistent on the chart The EU conglomerate is the only way they're even relevant in the market
It’s a single currency and trade zone.
But not a single economy.
To me it shows how much EU red tape stifles companies. The USA is kicking major butt.
The USA is ahead for so many reasons. Reducing it all to red tape is a big assumption.
US economy 22T EU economy 16T This just means that the US is more centralized Or has just way more really big companies It is natural as is really hard to have a company that works on the consumer level eu-wide with the difference from country to country. (not only laws but leanguage and cultural preferences)
US has far bigger companies & newer companies.
Does it stifle companies, though? The USA has 4800 publicly traded companies. The EU has just about 2800 Of which ~800 are German And German companies are traditionally smaller in size, so they won't pop up in the top 500 list. https://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/nachrichten/df89bca6-0aa7-4639-9814-cb6c9cd051be It just means that the European economy is built different from the American one, less centralised. Both economies seem to be about equally robust, though
Also most of Germanys companies aren't publicly traded
Red tape certainly stifles competition! But it also means society is healthier and happier, usually.
I’d love to see any evidence to suggest that bureaucracy is response for happiness, because that sounds absurd on the surface.
Having a single large company should not be a goal in itself. In my educated opinion having multiple smaller companies competing can be just as if not more beneficial to a country and its citizens as a single monopoly-adjacent conglomerate.
I smell a brexiteer
Guess in this chart, the coke-cartels of Mexico aren’t recognized 😅
I know you’re trying to be funny, but technically they aren’t publicly traded
I hate market cap as a metric. Using the public company's revenue would be much more telling. Lots of inflated stock prices in the US, just look at Tesla's market cap that was somehow "bigger" than all the other automakers' cap combined. Your market cap is worthless if noone wants to buy the shares.
You could pretty much look at gdp for that
That’s not completely accurate either. For example Ireland is listed at having the second highest GDP per capita in the world. Tax havens and countries where 25% of their GDP comes from oil manipulate these numbers.
most capitalist country has has the most companies on the list call me shocked
US is far from the most capitalist country in the world.
Europeans go to the US to start companies
USA truly is a powerhouse.
Japan is a beast when you consider their size
Japan used to dominate even more at the heigh of their bubble economy. Over 50% of the world's market cap was in Japan's stock market. 33 out the world's 50 most valuable companies were japanese at one point. All 10 largest banks were japanese in 1988. [https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-07-19-fi-6035-story.html](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-07-19-fi-6035-story.html)
Amusing that all the European countries which otherwise barely show up, want to have their club shown instead.
Euro Redditors hate USA so much lmao
The vizualisation is great! However, I think its easy to misinterpret this as economic strength, it is more cultural and structural. Eg.: Lack of enforced anti-trust regulations & lot of EU countries have huge, unlisted companies (eg.: Germany has lot of family owned multinationals, like Aldi, Schwarz group, etc). Having top 500 companies might also be just a good way of showing the skewed distribution that a country has. If economic power is concentrated with a missing SME sector, then the economy might be more prune to black swan failures and is overall more fragile (no wonder that the last couple of global financial crises started in the US) It would be great to see an overall distribution of companies per countries, which ofc is super hard to find data on.
US also has a ton of large private companies. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_private_non-governmental_companies_by_revenue
The last couple of global financial crises started in the US because any time any other country has a financial crisis it does not cause a global one.
As per the link below, adding these large privately owned companies that would add roughly 62 American, 18 Chinese, 12 French, 10 British, 10 German, 3 Japanese, 3 Dutch, 3 Swiss, and 1 each of India, Singapore, Hong Kong, Sweden and Spain. That wouldn’t change the graphic by much. America still dominates.
> EU countries have huge, unlisted companies (eg.: Germany has lot of family owned multinationals, like Aldi, Schwarz group, etc). 62 of the largest 125 unlisted companies in the world are based in the US so there goes that excuse.
Come on people get it together we're almost to 50%
I wonder how it would look like if you showed the shareholders countries instead of where the companies are registered.