Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Developed market

A developed market refers to the financial markets of countries exhibiting advanced economic structures, including high per-capita , sustained , industrialized sectors, and sophisticated that supports efficient allocation. These markets feature mature and exchanges with high , transparency, and investor protections enforced through stringent regulations, distinguishing them from emerging markets where such attributes are less established. Classification as developed typically hinges on empirical criteria like thresholds, market size, trading volume, and accessibility for foreign investors, as assessed annually by index providers such as . Prominent examples include the , Japan, the , , and , which collectively dominate global indices like the MSCI World Index, representing over 80% of its weight due to their large-cap dominance and economic scale. These markets have historically delivered stable returns through diversified sectors such as , , and consumer goods, underpinned by rule-of-law institutions that minimize expropriation risks and facilitate long-term investment. However, challenges persist, including demographic aging in many such economies leading to slower growth potential, elevated public debt burdens, and vulnerability to distortions that can inflate asset bubbles without corresponding productivity gains. In contexts, developed markets serve as benchmarks for diversification, offering lower compared to emerging counterparts but often lower prospective returns amid and bottlenecks. Their reflects causal pathways from post-World War II industrialization and liberalization, fostering that enabled technological leadership, though recent stagnation in highlights limits to further convergence without structural reforms.

Definition and Characteristics

Core Criteria for Classification

Classification as a developed market hinges on demonstrable economic maturity, robust financial , and institutional stability, as assessed by major index providers such as , , and . A foundational economic criterion is high () per capita, typically exceeding the World Bank's high-income threshold of $13,935 (based on 2023 Atlas method calculations for fiscal year 2025 classifications). This threshold reflects sustained productivity and living standards, with developed markets required to maintain levels well above emerging economy benchmarks to ensure long-term viability rather than transient booms. Financial market depth and form another core pillar, evaluated through metrics like total capitalization as a of GDP (often exceeding 50-100% in developed markets), trading relative to size, and the breadth of listed securities accessible to institutional investors. , for instance, incorporates size and requirements to confirm that a supports efficient global allocation, excluding those with insufficient free-float-adjusted or turnover that could distort index tracking. similarly weighs infrastructure, including settlement efficiency and dealing costs, alongside quantitative tests for to differentiate developed from advanced emerging markets. S&P emphasizes macroeconomic stability, such as low (typically under 5% annually) and fiscal prudence, integrated with conditions to ensure markets can absorb large foreign inflows without spikes. Institutional and accessibility factors underscore the causal link between governance quality and market reliability, prioritizing , regulatory transparency, and foreign investor protections. MSCI's assesses market accessibility via qualitative reviews of barriers like capital controls, taxation, and information disclosure, informed by investor surveys to capture real-world frictions. FTSE Russell incorporates creditworthiness—often requiring investment-grade sovereign ratings from agencies like Moody's or S&P—and regulatory environments conducive to timely trade execution and custody. Political stability and policy predictability are qualitative overlays across , as evidenced by S&P's reliance on global investor feedback to validate conditions like enforceable contracts and minimal expropriation risk, which empirically correlate with lower equity risk premia in developed markets. These criteria are reviewed annually, with reclassifications rare and requiring multi-year evidence of to avoid rewarding superficial reforms over structural depth.

Economic and Financial Indicators

Developed markets exhibit advanced , primarily measured by high (GNI) or (GDP) . Classification frameworks such as MSCI's require GNI to sustain at least 25% above the World Bank's high-income threshold—$14,005 in 2023—for three consecutive years as a baseline for developed status evaluation, though established developed markets far exceed this, with averages well into five figures. The International Monetary Fund's advanced economies, aligning closely with developed market designations, recorded an average GDP of $61,970 in 2025 projections. These levels reflect sustained , technological adoption, and diversified economies, contrasting with emerging markets where often lags below $10,000. Financial indicators underscore the depth and efficiency of capital markets in developed economies. Equity markets typically feature large total market capitalization, often surpassing 100% of GDP, alongside a broad base of listed companies—frequently hundreds or thousands per exchange—to ensure diversification and scale. and both prioritize size metrics, such as minimum investable market capitalization thresholds (e.g., exceeding $1 billion for constituent securities in MSCI reviews), to confirm sufficient breadth for institutional . Liquidity remains a hallmark, evaluated through metrics like the annualized traded value ratio (ATVR), where developed markets must achieve at least 20% under criteria to demonstrate ease of entry and exit without significant price disruption. This encompasses tightness (narrow bid-ask spreads), depth (capacity to absorb large orders), breadth (diverse participant base), immediacy (rapid execution), and resiliency (quick price recovery post-trade). Such characteristics enable high turnover ratios, often above 50% annually, supported by platforms, robust clearing systems, and minimal restrictions—typically under 10% limits in practice. markets parallel this maturity, with developed yields reflecting low default risk and active secondary trading.
IndicatorTypical Developed Market Threshold/ExampleSource Framework
GNI/GDP per Capita>$17,500 (125% of high-income); avg. ~$62,000, IMF
Market Cap (% GDP)>50-100%General (e.g., data)
Annualized Traded Value Ratio≥20%
Number of Listed CompaniesHundreds to thousands,

Institutional and Regulatory Features

Developed markets are characterized by mature institutional frameworks that emphasize the , secure property rights, and effective governance mechanisms, which underpin economic predictability and investor protection. These institutions typically include independent judiciaries capable of enforcing contracts and resolving disputes impartially, reducing risks of expropriation or arbitrary interference. According to the World Bank's , developed market economies consistently rank in the upper percentiles for rule of law—often exceeding the 90th percentile—reflecting high confidence in societal rules, including those governing property and commercial transactions. Such frameworks contrast with those in emerging markets, where weaker enforcement correlates with higher volatility and lower investment inflows. Regulatory environments in developed markets prioritize transparency, stability, and adherence to international standards, with independent bodies overseeing financial sectors to mitigate systemic risks. Central banks, such as the and the , operate with statutory independence and explicit mandates for , often targeting inflation around 2%, which supports long-term monetary credibility. Financial regulations align with global benchmarks like the accords for banking capital adequacy—implemented fully in jurisdictions like the and by 2019—and IOSCO's 38 principles for securities regulation, ensuring fair markets, investor safeguards, and efficient infrastructure. These measures, assessed through frameworks like MSCI's market accessibility criteria, confirm developed markets' minimal qualitative barriers, including robust and timely financial disclosures. Corruption levels remain low, bolstering institutional integrity; Transparency International's 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index shows developed markets averaging scores above 80 out of 100, with leaders like at 90, compared to global averages below 50. This is reinforced by comprehensive anti-corruption laws and oversight, such as the U.S. (1977) and equivalent directives, which promote ethical business practices and deter . Overall, these features enable efficient capital allocation, with developed markets exhibiting lower default rates and higher credit ratings from agencies like Moody's and S&P, reflecting credible enforcement.

Historical Context

Origins of Market Classification Terminology

The distinction between developed and emerging markets emerged in the context of expanding global investment opportunities beyond traditional industrialized economies during the late . Prior to the 1980s, financial discourse primarily referenced markets in , , and —characterized by high per capita, established regulatory frameworks, and liquid securities exchanges—without a formalized against "emerging" counterparts; these were often simply termed "industrialized" or "advanced" in line with post-World War II economic categorizations by bodies like the , founded in 1961 to coordinate policy among high-income nations. The push for new terminology arose as institutions sought to reframe investment in formerly peripheral economies, previously labeled "less developed" or "" in War-era geopolitical terms, which carried negative connotations of instability and poverty. In 1981, Antoine van Agtmael, an economist at the (IFC), a affiliate, coined the term "emerging markets" during a conference in to describe equity markets in countries such as , , , , , and , emphasizing their growth potential and transition toward global integration rather than inherent backwardness. This was initially proposed for an IFC fund targeting these markets, marking a deliberate shift to aspirational language that highlighted dynamism and improvements, such as stock market liberalizations in the 1970s and early 1980s. By contrast, "developed markets" became the residual category for mature economies with sustained high GDP per capita (typically above $20,000 in contemporary dollars), robust investor protections, and minimal barriers to foreign participation, exemplified by the 21 countries in the original Index launched in 1970 by Capital International ('s predecessor). The IFC began systematically tracking indices for these emerging markets in the early 1980s, formalizing data collection on about 10 such countries by 1981. The terminology gained traction with the launch of the IFC Investable Emerging Markets Indexes in 1989 and MSCI's Emerging Markets Index in 1988, which explicitly segmented global equities into developed (covering 22 countries initially, focusing on size, , and ) versus emerging baskets to guide allocation amid rising flows to non- economies. This classification reflected causal factors like debt crises in the 1980s prompting structural reforms in and , enabling market deepening, though it also embedded investor risk premia based on empirical differences in volatility and governance—developed markets exhibited lower standard deviations in returns (e.g., volatility around 15-20% annually in the 1980s versus 25-30% for early emerging proxies). Over time, the framework influenced multilateral definitions, such as the IMF's "advanced economies" list formalized in the 1990s, but its financial origins prioritized investability over pure economic metrics, leading to anomalies like South Korea's retention in emerging status despite OECD membership in 1996 due to accessibility hurdles.

Post-World War II Economic Maturation

Following the conclusion of World War II in 1945, economies in Western Europe and Japan, which had suffered extensive wartime destruction, underwent rapid reconstruction facilitated by international institutions and aid programs that laid the groundwork for mature market systems. The Bretton Woods Agreement of July 1944 established the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (now World Bank), creating a framework of fixed but adjustable exchange rates pegged to the U.S. dollar, which was convertible to gold, thereby promoting monetary stability and facilitating international trade among what would become developed markets. This system, operational from 1958 after initial postwar adjustments, supported consistent economic expansion by reducing currency volatility and encouraging capital flows. In , the U.S.-initiated , enacted in 1948, provided approximately $13 billion in grants and loans to 16 Western European countries between 1948 and 1952, equivalent to about 3-4% of the recipients' combined GDP annually, which accelerated industrial recovery, modernized infrastructure, and boosted intra-European trade through reduced barriers. This aid, combined with domestic policies emphasizing investment and productivity, contributed to an average annual real GDP growth of around 5% across developed market economies from 1950 to 1973, a period often termed the "" of due to sustained expansion without major recessions. In the United States, the shift from wartime production to consumer goods post-1945 unleashed pent-up demand, quadrupling automobile sales and driving per capita real income growth of 3-4% annually through the early . Japan's postwar trajectory exemplified this maturation, with real GDP growing at an average annual rate of over 9% from 1955 to 1973, transforming it from a war-ravaged into the world's second-largest economy by the through , high domestic savings rates enabling cheap capital for expansion, and government-guided policies under the Ministry of International Trade and Industry. This era saw the deepening of financial markets, the rise of stock exchanges as key allocators of capital, and the establishment of regulatory frameworks that prioritized stability and efficiency, hallmarks of developed markets. By the , these economies exhibited high incomes, advanced technological adoption, and integrated global trade networks, distinguishing them from emerging counterparts.

Development of Index-Based Systems

The formalization of index-based systems for classifying developed markets emerged in the late , driven by the need for standardized global equity benchmarks amid growing international investment. Capital International, founded in 1965 and a precursor to , launched the first indices covering non-U.S. markets in 1968, initially focusing on established economies in , , and select Asia-Pacific nations deemed to have mature financial infrastructures. These early efforts prioritized markets with sufficient liquidity, regulatory stability, and data availability, laying the groundwork for distinguishing "developed" status based on empirical investability rather than solely GDP or qualitative assessments. A pivotal advancement occurred in 1988 with MSCI's launch of the Emerging Markets Index, which explicitly bifurcated global equities into developed and emerging categories to address investor demand for diversified, risk-adjusted exposure. This system, refined over subsequent decades, evaluates markets annually across economic development (e.g., GDP per capita exceeding $25,000 in purchasing power parity terms), market accessibility (e.g., foreign ownership limits below 10% for at least 75% of market cap), and structural factors like settlement efficiency and transparency, using quantitative thresholds derived from historical data on over 80 countries. By 2025, MSCI classified 24 markets as developed, covering approximately 85% of global investable equity market capitalization in those jurisdictions. The framework's emphasis on causal factors like capital flow ease and institutional quality—rather than political narratives—has influenced trillions in assets under management, as passive funds track these indices. FTSE Russell parallelly developed its Equity Country Classification in the 1990s and 2000s, expanding on FTSE's global index series to incorporate granular tiers including Developed, Advanced Emerging, and Secondary Emerging, with semi-annual and annual reviews informed by advisory committees and empirical metrics. Unlike earlier ad hoc categorizations, FTSE's process integrates over 50 indicators, such as custody and clearing systems (requiring T+2 settlement cycles) and market depth (e.g., annual turnover exceeding 20% of market cap), evidenced in its 2018 methodology paper and subsequent updates like the 2025 reclassification of Greece to Developed based on sustained post-2010 reforms. This evidence-driven approach, prioritizing verifiable data over institutional consensus, has upgraded markets like Poland to Developed status in 2018—the first in Central and Eastern Europe—reflecting causal improvements in liquidity and foreign access rather than lagged economic aggregates. Together, these systems evolved from rudimentary benchmarks to rigorous, data-centric tools, enabling precise allocation in an era of index-linked investing exceeding $10 trillion globally by 2020.

Major Classification Frameworks

MSCI Market Classification

The Market Classification Framework categorizes global equity markets into developed, emerging, frontier, or standalone based on three pillars: , size and liquidity, and market accessibility. Developed markets must satisfy stringent thresholds across all pillars to ensure high investability for international investors, reflecting mature economic structures, deep capital markets, and minimal barriers to foreign participation. This classification underpins 's flagship indices, such as the MSCI World Index, which tracks large- and mid-cap securities from these markets. Economic development for developed status requires a country's gross national income (GNI) per capita to exceed the high-income threshold by at least 25% for three consecutive years, using Atlas methodology data. Size and liquidity criteria demand a minimum of five eligible companies with full market capitalization of at least the equivalent of USD 2.5 billion (adjusted periodically), float-adjusted market cap of USD 1.25 billion, and annual traded value ratio (ATVR) of 20% or higher, ensuring sufficient . Market accessibility evaluates four sub-factors—foreign ownership limits, capital inflow/outflow ease, operational market efficiency, and institutional framework stability—each rated "very high" for developed markets, based on quantitative metrics like settlement cycles ( or shorter) and qualitative assessments of regulatory transparency. MSCI conducts an annual Market Classification Review in June, incorporating a prior Market Accessibility Review, with results announced to align index composition while minimizing market disruptions; off-cycle reviews occur for material events. As of the 2025 review announced on June 24, 2025, no reclassifications affected developed markets, maintaining the existing 23 countries: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and . These markets collectively represent approximately 85% of each country's free-float adjusted in the World Index. Reclassifications to developed status are rare, requiring sustained fulfillment of all criteria without lapses in accessibility or liquidity.

FTSE Russell Equity Country Classification

The FTSE Russell Equity Country Classification framework categorizes global equity markets into four tiers—Developed, Advanced Emerging, Secondary Emerging, and —using a transparent, evidence-based process that evaluates market accessibility, infrastructure, and economic maturity to guide index inclusion and investor allocation. Developed markets occupy the top tier, signifying economies with fully operational financial systems, unrestricted foreign investor participation, and high standards of and that minimize risks associated with trading and custody. Central to the classification is the FTSE Quality of Markets matrix, which applies 22 specific criteria across four pillars: market infrastructure (including pricing dissemination and trading hours overlapping with major centers), regulatory and environment (encompassing audited under international standards and equitable taxation for foreign investors), dealing landscape (covering transaction costs below 50 basis points and account availability), and custody and (requiring delivery-versus-payment within standard cycles without pre-funding). For Developed status, markets must achieve a "pass" on all criteria with no outright failures—though isolated "restricted" ratings may be permissible if non-systemic—and demonstrate sustained compliance over multiple review periods. Complementary quantitative thresholds include a minimum investable market capitalization exceeding 5 basis points of the FTSE Developed All Cap Index aggregate and at least five eligible securities, verified using end-June data. Economic qualifiers mandate high World Bank gross national income per capita (above the high-income threshold of approximately $13,845 as of 2023 data) and investment-grade credit ratings from major agencies. The review process occurs annually in September, with classifications announced in October following analysis by the independent FTSE Equity Country Classification Advisory Committee, which convenes quarterly to assess evidence from market questionnaires, broker surveys, and custodian reports. Potential reclassifications trigger placement on a Watch List, requiring a 12-month period of monitoring to confirm improvements, such as resolved failures or enhanced convertibility. Interim reviews in March address urgent developments, like regulatory shifts. In the September 2025 review, advanced to Developed status effective September 21, 2026, having met all Quality of Markets criteria, size benchmarks, high GNI per capita, and investment-grade ratings after years of post-crisis reforms improving and oversight. This upgrade reflects FTSE Russell's emphasis on empirical progress over legacy labels, contrasting with more conservative frameworks. As of October 7, 2025, 26 markets hold Developed classification, encompassing traditional Western economies alongside and other advanced jurisdictions like , , , , and , which satisfy FTSE's rigorous accessibility tests despite geopolitical or structural variances that may delay recognition elsewhere. These inclusions stem from verifiable data on low , efficient clearing systems, and substantial free-float capitalizations, enabling seamless integration into benchmarks like the FTSE Developed All Cap Index. Downgrades are rare but possible if criteria falter, as monitored via ongoing data feeds and committee oversight.

S&P Dow Jones Indices Approach

classifies countries into developed, emerging, standalone, or frontier categories based on a multi-faceted methodology that combines quantitative thresholds, qualitative evaluations, and input from global investors to assess market maturity and investability. This framework prioritizes empirical indicators of economic advancement, depth, and institutional reliability, with classifications reviewed periodically to account for structural changes. Quantitative criteria form the foundational screening, requiring countries to meet minimum standards across economic development, market size, liquidity, and breadth. For developed market status, a key economic benchmark is nominal gross national income (GNI) per capita of at least US$12,695, calculated via the World Bank Atlas method, ensuring alignment with high-income economies. Market size is evaluated through total float-adjusted market capitalization exceeding US$1 billion and a sufficient number of securities meeting liquidity tests, such as a value traded ratio above specified levels over trailing periods. Liquidity is gauged by annual turnover ratios, typically demanding values indicative of active trading, while breadth assesses the diversity of listed constituents. Qualitative factors supplement these metrics, examining macroeconomic stability, , regulatory frameworks for investor protection, and market accessibility features like foreign ownership limits, settlement efficiency, and transparent pricing mechanisms. Countries must demonstrate low for international capital, robust legal systems enforcing contracts, and minimal custodial or operational risks to qualify as developed. Investor consultations, such as those conducted in 2018, incorporate feedback from asset managers and allocators to validate or adjust classifications, reflecting real-world usability over purely statistical benchmarks. This approach underpins indices like the S&P Developed BMI, which aggregates equities from classified developed markets, excluding those failing accessibility or liquidity hurdles. As of 2025, the methodology maintains high barriers for developed status, with only established economies—such as the , , and members—meeting the full suite of requirements, underscoring a conservative stance against premature upgrades that could misalign with perceptions.

IMF and Multilateral Classifications

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) divides economies into advanced economies and emerging market and developing economies in its World Economic Outlook (WEO), with the advanced category providing a core multilateral reference for developed markets due to its emphasis on structural sophistication beyond mere income levels. The primary criteria include high per capita income, a diversified export structure with a low and stable share of primary commodities, and deep integration into global financial systems, though the process involves qualitative judgment and evolves historically rather than adhering to a fixed formula. As of the April 2025 WEO—unchanged in the subsequent October edition—the IMF lists 41 advanced economies, encompassing major jurisdictions such as the , , , the , , , , , and , alongside smaller or non-sovereign entities including , Hong Kong SAR (China), Macao SAR (China), (United States), , and Taiwan Province of China. The full roster also features , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Slovak Republic, , , and . Reclassifications are rare and consensus-driven; for instance, joined in October 2023 following eurozone accession and sustained institutional reforms, while (, , ) and Slovakia were added between 2004 and 2010 amid integration. The classifies economies annually by (GNI) per capita, assigning high-income status to those exceeding $14,005 for fiscal year 2026 (covering July 2025–June 2026), calculated as the Atlas method average over the prior three years and updated each July 1. This yields roughly 80 high-income economies, a superset of IMF advanced economies that includes commodity-reliant states like and the —deemed emerging by the IMF due to narrower export diversification and financial market depth—thus rendering thresholds less precise for market development assessments. Recent shifts include Costa Rica's elevation to high-income in July 2025, driven by GNI growth from and diversification. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with 38 members as of 2025, implicitly designates developed economies through membership criteria emphasizing high-income status, market-oriented policies, and institutional maturity, though it excludes formal development labeling. Members include all major IMF advanced economies except non-members like Hong Kong SAR, Singapore, and Taiwan Province of China, while incorporating Mexico and Turkey—often classified as emerging markets owing to higher volatility and shallower capital markets. The OECD's focus on peer review for policy convergence reinforces its alignment with developed market traits, but its inclusion of transitional economies highlights variations across multilaterals. United Nations classifications, via bodies like UNCTAD, define developed economies geographically as , (including ), , , and , prioritizing historical industrialization and human development metrics over financial criteria, which results in overlap with IMF lists but omission of advanced microstates and Asian financial hubs. These frameworks collectively underscore developed markets' hallmarks—sustained high , , and liquid capital markets—yet diverge in scope, with IMF assessments most influential for investment indexing due to their balanced structural evaluation.

Composition and Lists

Current Developed Markets by Region

Developed markets are geographically diverse, spanning , , , and the , with classifications reflecting mature equity markets characterized by high liquidity, robust regulatory frameworks, and broad investor access. As of October 2025, the Developed Markets Index includes 23 countries, serving as a benchmark for many investors due to its emphasis on , market accessibility, and investability criteria evaluated annually. FTSE Russell's classification aligns closely but incorporates additional markets like (developed since 2009) and (reclassified to developed in September 2025 from advanced emerging status based on improved market size, liquidity, and custody risk). These lists prioritize empirical metrics such as exceeding $1 trillion for developed status in FTSE's framework and sustained economic stability in MSCI's assessments, though discrepancies arise from differing weights on factors like foreign ownership limits.

North America

North American developed markets dominate global equity benchmarks, accounting for over 60% of the MSCI World Index's weight as of mid-2025, driven by the scale of the U.S. economy (nominal GDP of approximately $28.8 trillion in 2024) and Canada's resource-rich stability.
  • Canada: Classified as developed across MSCI and FTSE due to its high per capita income (around $52,000 USD in 2024), diversified sectors including energy and finance, and Toronto Stock Exchange liquidity surpassing 80% free float.
  • United States: The cornerstone of developed markets, with the NYSE and Nasdaq representing over $50 trillion in market cap as of September 2025, underpinned by advanced technological innovation and GDP growth projected at 2.0% for 2025 by the IMF.

Europe

European developed markets encompass 15 countries in MSCI's framework, featuring integrated economies within the and strong welfare systems, though varying growth rates (e.g., 's 0.2% projected for 2025) highlight internal disparities. FTSE includes these plus post-2025 reclassification, citing enhanced turnover and reduced political risk.

Asia-Pacific

This region includes five MSCI-developed markets, blending advanced manufacturing () with financial hubs (, ), contributing about 15% to global developed indices despite demographic challenges like Japan's aging population. FTSE concurs on these, excluding from MSCI's developed list due to ongoing barriers to foreign investment evaluated in MSCI's 2025 review.
  • , , , , : 's ASX 200 reflects resource-driven stability with 2024 GDP growth of 1.5%; 's Hang Seng benefits from China ties but maintains developed liquidity; 's hit record highs in 2025 amid yen depreciation; emphasizes agriculture and low corruption; 's underscores banking efficiency with per capita GDP over $80,000 USD.
  • (FTSE only): Classified developed by FTSE since 2009, with market cap over $2 trillion and electronics sector dominance, though MSCI retains emerging status citing quota systems on foreign holdings as of August 2025 review.

Middle East

  • Israel: The sole developed market in both and FTSE classifications, driven by innovation in tech and biotech, with GDP per capita near $55,000 USD in 2024 despite geopolitical tensions; its inclusion stems from high R&D spending (5% of GDP) and cross-listings exceeding 60 firms.

Variations Across Classifiers

Different classification frameworks for developed markets employ varying criteria, including economic maturity, , , regulatory frameworks, and accessibility for foreign investors, leading to discrepancies in country inclusions. , for instance, maintains a list of 23 developed markets as of its latest annual review, emphasizing stringent standards for market efficiency and institutional robustness, which excludes due to persistent barriers to and trading practices despite its high GDP of approximately $35,000 in 2024. In contrast, classifies 25 markets as developed, incorporating based on assessments of its improved settlement cycles, reduced , and overall equity market development, effective since its 2009 upgrade. S&P Dow Jones Indices adopts a criteria-driven approach focusing on 80% free float-adjusted coverage, , and qualitative factors like political stability, resulting in a developed markets universe of around 24 countries that aligns closely with by including while mirroring on core Western economies and . These equity-focused providers differ from the IMF's broader "advanced economies" grouping in the World Economic Outlook, which as of April 2025 encompasses 41 entities based primarily on sustained high income levels (typically above $12,000 GNI ), diversified export structures, and low , thus including , , and even smaller territories like alongside the standard list, but prioritizing over investability. Notable variations extend to borderline cases; for example, remains developed under since its 2020 reinstatement following a 2013-2019 standalone status amid the , but is set to elevate it from advanced emerging to developed effective September 2026 after evaluating enhancements in market transparency and liquidity post-2020 reforms. , upgraded by to developed in 2010 citing superior financial reporting and trading volume, is similarly treated as developed by since 2021 and S&P, though earlier FTSE classifications lagged due to scrutiny of settlement risks. Such divergences arise from proprietary scoring models—'s quantitative emphasis on (40% weight) versus FTSE's balanced qualitative review—potentially impacting benchmark indices like the (23 countries, $60 trillion benchmarked assets) versus FTSE Developed All Cap (broader coverage).
CountryMSCIFTSE RussellS&P Dow JonesIMF
South KoreaEmergingDevelopedDevelopedAdvanced
GreeceDevelopedTo Developed (Sept 2026)DevelopedAdvanced
IsraelDevelopedDevelopedDevelopedAdvanced
These inconsistencies underscore the subjective elements in classification, where index providers' methodologies reflect trade-offs between conservatism (e.g., MSCI's caution on accessibility risks) and inclusivity (e.g., FTSE's responsiveness to reforms), influencing asset allocation as investors tracking MSCI indices underweight South Korea's $1.7 trillion market cap relative to FTSE trackers.

Comparisons with Other Market Types

Distinctions from Emerging Markets

Developed markets are characterized by significantly higher levels of economic advancement compared to s, primarily reflected in metrics. According to (IMF) classifications, advanced economies—synonymous with developed markets—exhibit GDP per capita exceeding $60,000 in current U.S. dollars as of 2025 projections, in contrast to approximately $6,800 for and developing economies. This disparity stems from sustained industrialization, diversified export bases, and integration into global trade networks, enabling developed markets to maintain lower but more predictable growth rates, often around 1-2% annually, versus the higher volatility and potential for 4-6% growth in s driven by catch-up industrialization. Institutionally, developed markets demonstrate superior , regulatory frameworks, and structures that foster investor confidence and . MSCI's market classification framework emphasizes that developed markets require "very high" alongside robust institutional environments, including effective legal systems and low , which are prerequisites for minimal barriers to foreign . In contrast, emerging markets often contend with weaker enforcement of property rights, higher political risks, and less diversified regulatory oversight, leading to greater susceptibility to policy shifts or expropriation concerns, as evidenced by comparative analyses of institutional quality indices where developed markets consistently score higher on metrics like and control of . Financial market characteristics further delineate the two, with developed markets featuring deeper liquidity, broader participation, and advanced accessibility standards. Under criteria, developed markets must meet stringent thresholds for market size, trading volume, and ease of capital flows, resulting in highly liquid and markets with lower transaction costs and turnover ratios often below 100% annually. Emerging markets, however, typically exhibit shallower markets with higher illiquidity premiums, restricted limits, and elevated settlement risks, contributing to amplified price swings during global shocks. Risk profiles underscore these distinctions, as developed markets prioritize stability over rapid expansion, yielding lower volatility in asset returns—standard deviations of equity indices around 15-20% versus 25-35% for emerging counterparts—and reduced exposure to currency devaluations or sovereign defaults. Empirical evidence from IMF assessments highlights that while emerging markets offer higher expected returns due to growth premiums, their institutional frailties amplify downside risks, such as those observed in currency crises or commodity dependence, absent in the more resilient, diversified structures of developed economies.

Differences from Frontier Markets

Developed markets exhibit far greater economic maturity than , with () routinely surpassing the World Bank's high-income threshold of $14,005 (2023 Atlas method) and often exceeding $30,000 in countries like those in the G7. In comparison, typically register below upper-middle income levels, frequently under $5,000, with economies heavily dependent on commodities, , or nascent industries lacking diversification. This foundational disparity manifests in aggregate equity : developed markets totaled approximately $42.9 trillion as of 2011 data (with subsequent growth maintaining the scale), while combined reached only $0.6 trillion, underscoring their marginal size relative to global finance. Market infrastructure and liquidity represent another stark contrast, as developed markets feature deep pools of securities, high daily turnover ratios (often exceeding 100% annually in major exchanges), and sophisticated systems for trading, custody, and settlement that minimize costs and execution risks. Frontier markets, by contrast, contend with thin trading volumes, few liquid stocks (many below $2 billion market cap), and illiquid exchanges prone to wide bid-ask spreads and settlement delays, which amplify volatility and deter large-scale institutional participation. MSCI's classification framework emphasizes these liquidity shortfalls as primary hurdles preventing frontier markets from advancing, with criteria requiring substantial full market capitalization and turnover that most fail to meet. Institutionally, developed markets uphold robust frameworks with independent judiciaries, enforceable contracts, and minimal corruption—evidenced by high scores on governance indicators—fostering predictable environments for long-term investment. Frontier markets, however, often exhibit deficiencies in , regulatory transparency, and political , leading to elevated risks of policy reversals, expropriation, or civil unrest that undermine causal chains of economic progress. Investor accessibility reinforces this divide: developed markets impose few barriers to or , integrated via global indices, whereas frontier markets enforce capital controls, quotas, or bureaucratic hurdles, limiting inflows and perpetuating . These differences collectively position developed markets as anchors of global , while embody higher-reward but structurally riskier opportunities contingent on reforms.

Transitions and Reclassifications

Criteria for Upgrading or Downgrading

Major index providers such as , , and employ multifaceted criteria for upgrading markets from emerging or frontier to developed status, emphasizing sustained economic maturity, robust market infrastructure, and investor accessibility. These assessments occur through annual or semi-annual reviews, requiring countries to meet quantitative thresholds (e.g., , , trading volume) alongside qualitative evaluations of regulatory stability and institutional quality. Downgrades are infrequent and typically triggered by persistent failures in these areas, such as economic contraction, imposition of capital controls, or deterioration in , reflecting a commitment to irreversible progress rather than transient fluctuations. FTSE Russell's Equity Country Classification framework mandates compliance with 22 Quality of Markets criteria, spanning market infrastructure (e.g., efficient settlement cycles of or better, reliable central securities depositories), qualification standards (e.g., free float-adjusted exceeding USD 1 billion for largest stocks), size and liquidity benchmarks (e.g., annual turnover ratio above 20%), and regulatory oversight (e.g., transparent rules aligned with standards). Upgrades to Developed status require full satisfaction of these, verified through evidence-driven processes involving external advisory input, with markets placed on watch lists for monitoring persistence over multiple review cycles. Downgrades may ensue if criteria like custody risks or erode, though no Developed market has been demoted since the framework's inception. MSCI's Market Classification Framework structures evaluations around three pillars: economic development (sustainable GNI per capita via Atlas method exceeding thresholds akin to current , typically above USD 10,000 with upward trajectory); size and liquidity (at least three large- or mid-cap stocks with full market cap coverage over USD 1.5 billion each and a cumulative free-float-adjusted cap of USD 15 billion, plus sustained turnover above 15% of cap); and market accessibility (quantitative tests on limits below 20-40% ceilings, efficient , and , plus qualitative reviews of brokerage efficiency, taxation, and regulatory transparency). For upgrades, all pillars must be met consecutively over two annual reviews to ensure durability, while downgrades hinge on material breaches, such as heightened barriers post-upgrade. S&P Dow Jones Indices assesses upgrades using economic indicators (high nominal GNI per capita per data, e.g., exceeding USD 12,535 as of recent classifications), sovereign creditworthiness (investment-grade ratings from major agencies), and market attributes (broad-based liquidity, diversified capitalization with turnover ratios comparable to Developed peers, and advanced clearing/settlement systems). Qualitative factors include global investor perception and structural reforms; countries on watch lists, like or in 2025 reviews, must demonstrate sustained compliance without reversals in accessibility or stability for promotion. Downgrades are possible if GNI declines sharply or market distortions (e.g., illiquidity from shifts) persist, though the prioritizes stability to avoid disruptive index changes. The IMF's classification of advanced economies, while influential, relies more statically on per capita income levels (above USD 13,845 in 2023 terms), export sophistication, and institutional integration, without formal equity market upgrade processes; deviations here can indirectly prompt index provider scrutiny but lack the liquidity-focused dynamism of private classifiers. Across providers, criteria on empirical metrics mitigates subjectivity, yet application demands holistic judgment, with upgrades like Greece's 2025 FTSE promotion illustrating rigorous pre- and post-assessment monitoring.

Notable Historical and Recent Cases

One prominent historical case of reclassification involved , which upgraded from emerging to developed market status effective May 2010, following assessments of its , market accessibility, and liquidity; this inclusion integrated the MSCI Israel Index into the MSCI World Index and MSCI EAFE Index. The move reflected Israel's high per capita GDP, advanced technological sector, and improved foreign investor access, though subsequent challenges like regional geopolitical tensions highlighted limitations in post-upgrade performance relative to other developed markets. In contrast, experienced the first-ever downgrade from developed to status by , announced in June 2013 and effective November 2013, amid the European sovereign debt crisis that saw its plunge over 80% from pre-crisis peaks and capital controls severely restrict liquidity. followed with a similar downgrade earlier that year after Greece failed economic and tests. This reclassification underscored vulnerabilities in developed market criteria, as Greece's prior status had been based on integration and historical rather than resilient fundamentals during acute fiscal distress. More recently, reclassified back to developed market status on October 8, 2025, citing post-crisis reforms including fiscal consolidation, banking sector recapitalization, and improved market accessibility that restored investor confidence and equity liquidity. However, maintained Greece's emerging classification in its June 2025 review, as it failed to meet new size, liquidity, and persistency thresholds, illustrating ongoing divergences in classifier methodologies. South Korea provides another case of classifier variation: FTSE Russell upgraded it to developed status in September 2008 (effective 2009), recognizing its advanced economy and size, yet has retained emerging classification due to persistent limits and inefficiencies as of 2025. Efforts to align classifications continue, with announcing a 2025 roadmap for upgrade, potentially unlocking billions in passive inflows if achieved. These cases highlight how reclassifications often hinge on subjective accessibility metrics over pure economic metrics, with equity price reactions typically overshooting announcements before stabilizing.

Economic and Investment Implications

Advantages for Stability and Growth

Developed markets exhibit lower economic due to diversified economic structures and mature institutions, enabling more predictable trajectories compared to emerging markets, where fluctuations are significantly higher. This arises from entrenched rule-of-law systems, judiciaries, and low levels, which reduce expropriation risks and encourage sustained . Empirical analyses confirm that political exerts a stronger influence on financial in advanced economies than in emerging ones, facilitating deeper credit markets and efficient . Robust regulatory frameworks and oversight in developed markets safeguard against systemic failures, as evidenced by stricter enforcement mechanisms that maintain market integrity and investor confidence. Advanced —encompassing reliable transportation, grids, and digital networks—lowers operational costs and amplifies , supporting consistent output expansion. These factors contribute to against external shocks, with post-2002 showing declining sector and variance in returns within developed markets, indicative of reduced idiosyncratic risks. For growth, developed markets leverage high human capital, with widespread access to and skilled labor forces driving and technological adoption. Established industrial bases and service-oriented sectors enable incremental efficiencies, yielding compound annual GDP growth rates averaging 1.5-2.5% in advanced economies from 2010-2023, often outpacing volatility-adjusted returns in less stable counterparts. Liquid capital markets provide low-cost financing, channeling funds into R&D and upgrades, which sustain long-term expansion without the boom-bust cycles prevalent elsewhere. Overall, this framework prioritizes quality-adjusted growth over rapid but erratic surges, as lower equity risk premiums reflect empirically verified predictability.

Risks and Performance Realities

Developed markets, characterized by mature economies, exhibit lower volatility in equity returns compared to emerging markets, with the Index delivering annualized returns of approximately 7-8% since 2001, closely matching the MSCI Emerging Markets Index's 7.6% over the same period but with significantly reduced drawdowns during crises. However, long-term performance has lagged in growth phases for emerging markets; for instance, from 2010 to 2020, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index outperformed the by periods of up to 18% annually in select years, though developed markets recovered stronger post-2020 with cumulative returns exceeding 50% by 2023. This reflects a reality of subdued growth potential, as mature infrastructures and saturated markets limit expansion rates to 1-2% real GDP annually in aggregates like the , versus 4-6% in emerging peers. A primary risk stems from demographic shifts, with aging populations in developed economies—where the working-age has declined to 63% from a 1985-2000s plateau of 67%—projected to exacerbate labor shortages and dependency ratios exceeding 50% by 2050 in countries like and . This causal dynamic strains fiscal systems through elevated healthcare and pension expenditures, potentially crowding out productive investments and intensifying economic downside s, as evidenced by econometric models linking population aging to heightened volatility in output. Sovereign debt burdens amplify vulnerabilities, with advanced economies holding debt-to-GDP ratios averaging over 100% in 2024—Japan at 256%, the at around 120%, and Eurozone members like exceeding 160%—limiting policy flexibility amid rising interest costs that reached record levels globally. Shrinking workforces from depopulation further constrain revenue growth, fostering stagnation risks where debt servicing diverts funds from infrastructure, as seen in IMF projections of sustained high ratios through 2030. Elevated valuations pose correction risks, with the S&P 500's 10-year cyclically adjusted P/E ratio at 37.1 as of mid-2025—80% above the modern average of 20.5—signaling overextension relative to earnings, historically correlating with subdued 10-year forward returns of 3-5%. Similarly, components trade at forward P/E multiples 20-30% premium to historical norms, driven by low rates but vulnerable to normalization, as high starting valuations have preceded underperformance in prior cycles like 2000-2010. Geopolitical and political risks have intensified, surpassing those in some emerging markets by 2024 metrics, with events like U.S. elections and fragmentation disrupting supply chains and policy continuity in ostensibly stable environments. This underscores a performance reality: while developed markets provide ballast through institutional depth, their returns are increasingly pressured by endogenous factors like and slowdowns, yielding real returns below inflation-adjusted historical averages in low-growth scenarios.

Criticisms of the Framework

The classification of markets as "developed" has been critiqued for its arbitrary foundations, with early distinctions primarily relying on relative national wealth rather than comprehensive economic or institutional metrics, leading to subjective groupings that vary across index providers. For instance, acknowledges that initial separations between developed and emerging markets were "somewhat arbitrary," often prioritizing thresholds without fully accounting for structural factors like or dynamics. This arbitrariness persists, as evidenced by discrepancies between major classifiers: designates as emerging due to accessibility constraints like short-selling limits, while FTSE classifies it as developed, resulting in divergent index compositions and investor exposures. Critics argue that the framework's emphasis on investor-centric criteria, such as market accessibility and , introduces biases favoring Western financial norms over intrinsic developmental indicators, potentially misrepresenting economic maturity. MSCI's three-pillar assessment—economic development, market size/, and institutional framework—prioritizes ease of foreign flows and ownership openness, which can penalize economies with regulatory protections deemed restrictive, even if those policies support long-term stability. Such criteria have delayed reclassifications for high-GNI nations like , where foreign ownership caps and trading frictions persist despite advanced GDP exceeding many established developed markets. This investor-focused lens is said to exacerbate misclassifications, inflating portfolio tracking errors and risks when benchmarks diverge from actual economic trajectories. Furthermore, the framework's categorical rigidity overlooks evolving global realities, treating developed status as largely static and failing to incorporate metrics like technological adaptability or demographic pressures, which can erode advantages in markets like or parts of amid prolonged low growth and aging populations. Academic reviews highlight fragmented conceptualizations across studies, contributing to inconsistent applications that undervalue transitions in or levels. Proponents of retiring outdated labels contend that the developed-emerging distorts perceptions, as former "emerging" economies now drive global output while some developed ones exhibit stagnation, challenging the assumption of perpetual superiority in stability or returns.

Debates and Controversies

Subjectivity in Criteria Application

The application of criteria for classifying markets as developed entails both quantitative metrics and qualitative evaluations, the latter of which introduce inherent subjectivity. Major index providers such as MSCI and FTSE Russell assess economic development primarily through objective indicators like gross national income (GNI) per capita, where developed markets typically require levels exceeding approximately USD 12,000–15,000 adjusted for purchasing power parity, alongside sustained high rankings in the World Bank's income classifications. However, size and liquidity criteria, while involving measurable data on market capitalization and trading volumes, rely on thresholds that providers set discretionarily, such as minimum free float-adjusted market caps exceeding USD 1.5 billion for large-cap securities in MSCI's framework. Market accessibility, a core pillar, demands judgment on factors like foreign ownership limits, settlement efficiency, and regulatory transparency, where providers conduct annual reviews incorporating consultations with market participants, leading to interpretive differences. Disagreements among providers underscore this subjectivity; for instance, reclassified as developed in 2009 based on its fulfillment of accessibility and liquidity standards, yet has maintained its emerging status through 2025, citing ongoing barriers such as inadequate short-selling mechanisms and foreign exchange hedging availability for institutional investors. Analysts have highlighted that such decisions involve "a of subjectivity" in weighing persistent regulatory hurdles against economic maturity, where 's GNI per capita surpassed USD 35,000 by 2023, far exceeding typical developed thresholds, but qualitative accessibility scores remain below 's benchmarks. Similarly, , with a GNI per capita over USD 33,000 in 2023 and advanced technological , persists as emerging in indices due to perceived deficiencies in foreign investor protections and , despite meeting economic and size criteria. These cases illustrate how providers' interpretive frameworks—shaped by internal policy committees and input—can diverge, even for economies exhibiting comparable empirical profiles. Critics argue that early delineations between developed and emerging markets were "somewhat arbitrary," often prioritizing relative wealth over comprehensive investability, a legacy persisting in modern qualitative assessments. For example, Greece's 2019 downgrade to advanced emerging by FTSE amid its involved subjective evaluations of custodial and risks, yet its 2025 upgrade to developed status followed partial regulatory reforms, demonstrating how temporal judgments on influence outcomes. Such variability prompts concerns over consistency, as evidenced by the Monetary Fund's analysis of classification systems, which found divergences across institutions like the and in applying development thresholds, potentially amplifying biases toward established Western markets. Providers counter that their processes are evidence-driven and consultative, but the absence of uniform global standards allows for provider-specific priorities, such as MSCI's emphasis on foreign institutional access, to sway classifications. This subjectivity not only affects index composition but also national policy incentives, as countries lobby for upgrades through targeted reforms.

Impact on National Policies and Investor Flows

Governments aspiring to developed market classification often implement structural reforms to align with criteria from index providers like MSCI and FTSE Russell, which prioritize advanced economic development, robust market liquidity, sizable equity capitalization, and ease of foreign access. These reforms typically include liberalizing capital accounts, strengthening corporate governance standards, and upgrading settlement and custody systems to reduce operational risks for international investors. For example, emerging economies pursuing upgrades have enacted policies to diminish state ownership interference in listed firms and enhance sovereign bond market transparency, aiming to lower borrowing costs and attract sustained foreign holdings. Such policy shifts, while promoting integration into global finance, can strain domestic institutions if reforms prioritize index compliance over broader fiscal prudence, potentially exacerbating vulnerabilities during external shocks. Achieving or maintaining developed status influences macroeconomic policies by incentivizing sustained emphasis on , low , and monetary framework stability, as deviations risk downgrades that signal heightened political or economic risks to investors. In cases like South Korea's partial FTSE upgrade in 2009, authorities accelerated free-float increases and limits to meet accessibility thresholds, fostering a environment conducive to deeper integration despite MSCI's retention of emerging classification. Empirical analyses of structural reforms in transitioning economies reveal that successful alignments correlate with improved debt management and reduced reliance on volatile short-term funding, though outcomes depend on pre-existing institutional quality. Reclassification to developed market status drives significant investor inflows through passive index-tracking vehicles, as developed indices manage trillions in assets compared to emerging counterparts, prompting automatic rebalancing by funds. Studies of reclassifications document abnormal positive returns of 5-10% upon upgrade announcements, with inflows amplifying due to benchmark effects that extend beyond fundamental improvements. For instance, Israel's 2010 upgrade to developed status coincided with expanded foreign investments, reflecting heightened awareness and reduced perceived risks. Conversely, rare downgrades, such as Greece's 2013 shift to standalone status amid turmoil, precipitated outflows exceeding €50 billion in and , underscoring how classifications amplify capital flow volatility. These dynamics highlight that while upgrades stabilize long-term flows via lower risk premia, they can induce short-term price overshooting, with empirical evidence showing sustained inflows only if policy reforms endure post-reclassification.

References

  1. [1]
    Developed Economy: Definition, How It Works, HDI Indicator
    Sep 13, 2025 · A developed economy is one with sustained economic growth, security, high per-capita income, and advanced technological infrastructure.
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Emerging vs. Developed Markets Classification - MSCI
    The MSCI classification framework is based on an assessment of three dimensions: 1) economic development, 2) size and liquidity of equity markets, 3) market ...<|separator|>
  3. [3]
    [PDF] MSCI MARKET CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK
    The MSCI Market Classification Framework consists of following three criteria: economic development, size and liquidity as well as market accessibility. In ...
  4. [4]
    Developed Markets Indexes - MSCI
    The MSCI Developed Markets Indexes are designed to consider variations reflecting conditions across regions, market-cap segments, sectors and styles.
  5. [5]
    Investment fundamentals: Developed markets | SEI U.S.
    Developed markets are countries that are most progressed in terms of their economy and capital markets.
  6. [6]
    What are developed markets? | Investing Definitions - Morningstar
    Sep 16, 2021 · Developed markets are countries with industrialized economies, strong political and legal systems, and robust technological infrastructures.
  7. [7]
    What's the Difference Between Emerging and Developed Markets?
    Sep 12, 2022 · Developed nations have more advanced economies, better-developed infrastructure, more mature capital markets, and higher standards of living.
  8. [8]
    Market Classification - MSCI
    MSCI evaluates equity markets around the world each year to determine whether they should be classified as a developed, emerging, frontier or standalone market.MSCI Market Classification ...
  9. [9]
    Equity Country Classification - LSEG
    FTSE classifies markets as Developed, Advanced Emerging, Secondary Emerging, or Frontier, using criteria developed with international investors.Missing: economic | Show results with:economic
  10. [10]
    World Bank country classifications by income level for 2024-2025
    Jul 1, 2024 · Explore the updated World Bank country income classifications for 2024-2025, highlighting GNI per capita shifts and global economic trends.
  11. [11]
    World Bank Country and Lending Groups
    For the current 2026 fiscal year, low-income economies are defined as those with a GNI per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method, of $1,135 or ...
  12. [12]
    What's In Your International Equity ETF?
    Jan 11, 2022 · FTSE Russell uses six main criteria: World Bank GNI Per Capita rating; creditworthiness; market and regulatory environment; foreign exchange ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] MSCI Market Classification Framework
    The MSCI Market Classification Framework consists of following three criteria: economic development, size and liquidity as well as market accessibility. In ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Measuring Liquidity in Finiancial Markets - WP/02/232
    Liquid markets tend to exhibit five characteristics: (i) tightness; (ii) immediacy; (iii) depth; (iv) breadth; and (v) resiliency. Tightness refers to low ...
  15. [15]
    Worldwide Governance Indicators - World Bank DataBank
    Aggregate and individual governance indicators for six dimensions of governance: Voice and Accountability; Political Stability and Absence of ...Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
  16. [16]
  17. [17]
    2023 Corruption Perceptions Index: Explore the… - Transparency.org
    Corruption Perceptions Index 2023 · 90. Denmark1 · 87. Finland2 · 85. New Zealand3 · 84. Norway4 · 83. Singapore5 · 82. Sweden6 · 82. Switzerland6 · 79. Netherlands8.View latest · 2023 · 2022
  18. [18]
    History of emerging markets | Carmignac Flash Note
    Mar 31, 2021 · We go back to the 1980s to understand the origins of this term ➤ Carmignac Flash Note. ... Developed Market country. Did you know? Although China ...
  19. [19]
    Emerging Market - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    IFC economist Antoine van Agtmael coined the term “emerging market” in 1981. Fund managers at the time used the term “emerging market” to describe equity ...<|separator|>
  20. [20]
    Emerging Markets Indexes - MSCI
    MSCI launched one of the first EM investable benchmark indexes, MSCI Emerging Markets Index, in 1988. Design solutions for institutional portfolios. Use the EM ...
  21. [21]
    What drives a market's promotion to emerging market status?
    Aug 15, 2024 · The way in which MSCI classifies global equity markets is prescriptive. It has three key category groupings, from frontier to EM and developed ...
  22. [22]
    Bretton Woods-GATT, 1941–1947 - Office of the Historian
    The IBRD was responsible for providing financial assistance for the reconstruction of war-ravaged nations and the economic development of less developed ...
  23. [23]
    The operation and demise of the Bretton Woods system: 1958 to 1971
    Apr 23, 2017 · Beginning in 1944, the Bretton Woods system played a major role in shaping the global economy in the post-war period.
  24. [24]
    Marshall Plan, 1948 - Office of the Historian
    The Marshall Plan generated a resurgence of European industrialization and brought extensive investment into the region. It was also a stimulant to the U.S. ...
  25. [25]
    Restoring a Global Economy, 1950–1980 | Working Knowledge
    Aug 22, 2005 · Between 1950 and 1973 the annual real GDP growth of developed market economies averaged around 5 percent. This growth was smooth, with none of ...
  26. [26]
    The Post World War II Boom: How America Got Into Gear - History.com
    May 14, 2020 · After war rationing, Americans were ready to spend, factories shifted to peacetime production, and car sales quadrupled, leading to a boom.
  27. [27]
    The Twin Secrets of Economic Growth
    Sep 21, 2021 · In the United States, real income per capita grew in the 3%-4% range for much of the post-World War II period, from 1945-1973. In the years ...
  28. [28]
  29. [29]
    The Japanese Economic Miracle
    Jan 26, 2023 · Japan experienced rapid and sustained economic growth from 1945 to 1991, the period between post World War II and the end of the Cold War.
  30. [30]
    MSCI Index: Definition, What Does It Measure? - The Balance
    Jun 26, 2020 · In 1968, Morgan Stanley published the Capital International Indexes. These were the first indexes for markets outside of the United States. The ...<|separator|>
  31. [31]
    MSCI: Indexing the World - Quartr
    In 1988, MSCI launched its first major product under the new ownership: the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, covering 10 developing markets. At the time, these ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] FTSE Country Classification Process
    Mar 28, 2018 · This paper describes the FTSE country classification process which is designed to be transparent and evidence-driven.
  33. [33]
    FTSE Russell announces results of September 2025 semi-annual ...
    FTSE Russell announces results of September 2025 semi-annual country classification review for equities and fixed income · Vietnam to be reclassified from ...
  34. [34]
  35. [35]
    [PDF] the MSCI World index factsheet
    The MSCI World Index captures large and mid-cap representation across 23 Developed Markets, with 1,320 constituents, covering 85% of each country's free float- ...
  36. [36]
    MSCI Announces Results of the MSCI 2025 Market Classification ...
    Jun 24, 2025 · Additionally, Greece meets the economic development criteria for Developed Markets. Following the enhancements implemented to the Size and ...
  37. [37]
    [PDF] FTSE Equity Country Classification Process - LSEG
    This paper describes the FTSE Equity Country Classification process, which is designed to be transparent, and evidence driven. External advisory committees ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] FTSE Equity Country Classification September 2025 Announcement
    the twenty-two FTSE Quality of Markets criteria;. • the minimum investable market capitalisation and securities count requirements, based on data as of the ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Markets classified under the FTSE Equity Country Classification ...
    The table below shows the markets classified under the FTSE Equity Country Classification scheme as of 07 October. 2025. Developed. Advanced Emerging. Secondary ...
  40. [40]
    Market Classification | S&P Dow Jones Indices
    S&P DJI classifies markets as developed, emerging, or frontier using quantitative and qualitative criteria, and global investor feedback. Countries not ...
  41. [41]
    [PDF] S&P Dow Jones Indices: Index Methodology
    Sep 30, 2022 · Country classification analysis generally utilizes both quantitative and qualitative factors. S&P Dow. Jones Indices uses both criteria as a ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] S&P Dow Jones Indices' 2018 Country Classification Consultation
    Jun 13, 2018 · S&P DJI classifies countries as developed, emerging, or frontier, using quantitative and qualitative factors, and seeks investor feedback. ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] S&P Global BMI, S&P/IFCI - SPICE - S&P Dow Jones Indices
    Securities issued by companies domiciled in countries classified as developed or emerging markets are eligible for inclusion in the S&P Global BMI. The S&P/IFCI.
  44. [44]
    Navigating Developed Markets: The S&P World Index Explained
    Apr 8, 2025 · The S&P World Index covers developed market equities from 24 countries, tracking large and mid-cap stocks, and launched in 2009.
  45. [45]
    World Economic Outlook (WEO) - Frequently Asked Questions
    Apr 22, 2025 · The main criteria used by the WEO to classify the world into advanced economies and emerging market and developing economies are (1) per capita ...What is the WEO Update and... · Where can I send questions...
  46. [46]
    World Economic Outlook Database - Groups and Aggregates ...
    Classification of Economies in the World Economic Outlook (WEO) ; Advanced Economies ; Andorra Australia Austria Belgium Canada Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic
  47. [47]
  48. [48]
    [PDF] World Bank list of economies* (As of February 2025) - ISBD
    The groups are: low income, $1,145 or less; lower middle income, $1,146 to $4,515; upper middle income, $4,516 to $14,005; and high income, more than $14,005.
  49. [49]
    World Bank updates country income classifications for 2025-2026
    Jul 26, 2025 · For this year's category changes, Costa Rica joins the high income group. Bugatti and Samoa moved to the upper middle income group. Namibia ...
  50. [50]
    Members and partners - OECD
    The OECD's member countries and partners work on key global policy challenges to help drive and anchor reform around the world.OECD and G7 · OECD and APEC · Africa · Australia
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Country Classification 2025–AS of 24july 2025 - OECD
    Jul 24, 2025 · CLASSIFICATION OF COUNTRIES RELATING TO THE MINIMUM PREMIUM RULES. According to Article 22 of the Arrangement, High Income OECD countries and ...
  52. [52]
    Classifications | UNCTAD Data Hub - UNCTADstat
    In UNCTADstat, economies are grouped by geographic location, development status, as well as economic and institutional criteria.
  53. [53]
    Index Review - MSCI
    MSCI Global Investable Market Indexes August 2025 Index Review. MSCI Equity ... Developed Markets clients click here; Emerging Markets clients click here.Frontier Markets · India Domestic · US REIT · US Equity
  54. [54]
    MSCI vs FTSE: Which is the best index provider? - justETF
    Jan 14, 2025 · An ETF's results depend on its index. We explain the differences between the two major global index providers and why you shouldn't mix the two.
  55. [55]
    1. How do emerging markets differ from developed markets? a ...
    these sub- categories were: i) quality of the local institutional environment, ii) role of the state in business, iii) level of development of financial markets ...
  56. [56]
    Emerging Market Economies: Definition, Growth, and Key Players
    Levels of income, quality of financial systems, and growth rates are all popular criteria but the exact list of emerging market economies can vary depending on ...Missing: core | Show results with:core
  57. [57]
    [PDF] MSCI Market Classification Framework
    The MSCI Market Classification Framework consists of three criteria: Economic Development, Size and. Liquidity Requirements as well as Market Accessibility. In ...
  58. [58]
    [PDF] Frontier Markets in Asia and Beyond - IMF eLibrary
    What are the common characteristics of frontier markets? Table 8.4 provides a snapshot and useful comparators with emerging and developed markets.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  59. [59]
    [PDF] MSCI Frontier Emerging Markets Index Methodology
    Aug 1, 2023 · The country's GNI per capita is lower than the threshold for the upper middle income categories of the World Bank. During Annual Eligibility ...
  60. [60]
    Chapter 2. Lessons for Frontier Economies from the Recent ...
    Frontier economies face fundamental challenges in their economic and institutional development. They have to tackle deficiencies in governance, the rule of law, ...
  61. [61]
    [PDF] FTSE Equity Country Classification Process Enhancements October ...
    This document lists the enhancements to the FTSE Quality of Markets criteria and the FTSE ... Discontinuation of the 'Developed Equity Market' criterion.
  62. [62]
    [PDF] FTSE Equity Country Classification - September 2025 Annual ...
    Oct 7, 2025 · Ahead of the publication of the Annual Announcement, FTSE Russell consults members of the FTSE Equity Country. Classification Advisory ...
  63. [63]
    [PDF] S&P Dow Jones Indices' 2025 Equity Country Classification ...
    Jul 23, 2025 · S&P DJI is seeking feedback on whether to reclassify the countries listed below, which were identified as potential reclassification candidates ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] S&P Dow Jones Indices Country Classification – 2025/2026 Watchlist
    Jul 31, 2025 · The 2025 watchlist includes Greece (Emerging), Iceland (Frontier), and Poland (Emerging). Poland is also on the 2026 watchlist.
  65. [65]
    Israel: MSCI to Raise Rank to Developed Market
    Jun 15, 2009 · Israel's upgrade will take place in May 2010, when the MSCI Israel Index will be included in the MSCI World Index and in the MSCI EAFE Index.
  66. [66]
    MSCI Declares Israel Is Now a Developed Market - Haaretz Com
    Jun 17, 2009 · The MSCI Israel Index will be now be included in the MSCI World Index, which includes most developed markets, and in the MSCI EAFE Index, which ...
  67. [67]
    Israel Struggles With Upgrade From Emerging to Developed Market
    Aug 22, 2013 · Israel's TA-25 index is up 9.1 percent since the MSCI reclassification took effect, compared with a 71 percent rise in the Nasdaq Composite ...
  68. [68]
    MSCI drops Greece down to emerging market status
    Jun 11, 2013 · Greece will be reclassified as an emerging market by MSCI, marking the first time the firm has downgraded a developed market to emerging.
  69. [69]
    Greece Is Demoted as MSCI Shuffles Its Indexes - Bloomberg.com
    Jun 13, 2013 · On Tuesday it became the first developed market to be cut to emerging-market status by MSCI, which has $7 trillion in investor assets tracking its equity ...
  70. [70]
    MSCI cuts Greece from a developed to emerging nation - Taipei Times
    Jun 13, 2013 · Greece became the first developed nation to be downgraded to emerging-market status by MSCI Inc after its stock index plunged 83 percent ...<|separator|>
  71. [71]
    Greece cut to emerging market at MSCI in world first
    Jun 12, 2013 · Russell said in March it will downgrade Greece to an emerging from a developed market after it failed economic and operational-risk assessments.
  72. [72]
  73. [73]
    [PDF] MSCI Announces Results of the MSCI 2025 Market Classification ...
    Jun 24, 2025 · MSCI will extend consultation on Bulgaria's reclassification, monitor Korea's market accessibility, update Greece's status, and monitor ...Missing: list | Show results with:list
  74. [74]
  75. [75]
    South Korea to prepare roadmap for developed market upgrade
    Jul 15, 2025 · South Korea will prepare within this year a roadmap for its stock market to win developed market status from a global index provider, ...
  76. [76]
    [PDF] The Case of MSCI Country Reclassifications - NYU Stern
    Jan 17, 2017 · We study a comprehensive sample of past reclassifications to guide this decision. Reclassified markets' prices substantially overshoot between ...
  77. [77]
    Fiscal policy volatility and growth in emerging markets and ...
    The findings show that fiscal policy has been more volatile in emerging markets and developing economies than in advanced economies, and in commodity exporters ...
  78. [78]
    Political stability and financial development: An empirical investigation
    In addition, we provide evidence that the effect of political stability on financial development is stronger in advanced economies compared to emerging and ...
  79. [79]
    Investing Internationally: Developed vs. Developing Economies
    Feb 7, 2020 · Developed countries have advanced economies with high income and industrialization. Developing countries have rapid growth, but less mature ...Missing: distinguishing | Show results with:distinguishing
  80. [80]
    Developed markets - (International Economics) - Fiveable
    Developed markets are characterized by higher economic stability, advanced infrastructure, and more established financial systems compared to emerging markets.
  81. [81]
    Sector Effects in Developed vs. Emerging Markets - jstor
    Beginning in 2002, Panel A of Figure 1 shows that sector variance and country variance in the developed markets began to trend downward. This evidence suggests ...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] Comparative Analysis Of Emerging Markets Versus Developed ...
    Emerging markets have dynamic, volatile growth, while developed markets have stable, saturated growth. Emerging markets have low to medium per capita income, ...
  83. [83]
    Developed Markets Definition - TIOmarkets
    Jun 4, 2024 · Developed markets stand out as economies with mature financial infrastructures and high levels of income per capita.
  84. [84]
    [PDF] The Equity Risk Premium: Empirical Evidence from Emerging Markets
    The purpose of this paper is to show differences in the. ERP between developed and emerging markets. Using data from both markets, we first provide an ex-post ...
  85. [85]
    Rethinking Three Misconceptions About Emerging-Market Equities
    Feb 2, 2024 · Since 2001, the S&P 500 and the MSCI EM posted annualized returns of about 7.8% and 7.6% respectively—stronger performance than developed ...<|separator|>
  86. [86]
    [PDF] MSCI Emerging Markets Index (USD)
    2024. 7.50. 17.49. 18.67. 2023. 9.83. 22.20. 23.79. 2022. -20.09. -18.36. -18.14. 2021. -2.54. 18.54. 21.82. 2020. 18.31. 16.25. 15.90. 2019. 18.42. 26.60.
  87. [87]
    The Dramatic Evolution of Emerging Markets - Morningstar
    Jan 26, 2021 · When the MSCI Emerging Markets Index was launched in 1988, these stocks represented less than 1% of the world's investable equity market ...
  88. [88]
    Emerging vs. Developed Markets - Updated Chart - LongtermTrends
    Developed markets offer greater stability, transparency, and liquidity compared to emerging markets. They provide investors with access to well-regulated ...
  89. [89]
    The world's aging population may not be a risk to the global ...
    Jun 5, 2025 · In developed economies, the working-age ratio reached a plateau of around 67% from 1985 to the early 2000s but has since dropped to 63% and is ...
  90. [90]
    Confronting the consequences of a new demographic reality
    Jan 15, 2025 · Falling fertility rates shift the demographic balance toward youth scarcity and more older people, who are dependent on a shrinking working-age population.
  91. [91]
    What are the risks and opportunities of super-ageing populations?
    Jan 15, 2025 · From pension crises to labour shortages, super-ageing societies pose a global economic and labour market risk over the next decade and beyond.
  92. [92]
    Population aging and intensified economic downside risk
    We find that population aging significantly intensifies economic downside risk, particularly in regions with lower population scale or higher economic ...
  93. [93]
    Global public debt hit a record $102 trillion in 2024 - UNCTAD
    Global public debt reached an all-time high of $102 trillion in 2024, up from $97 trillion in 2023, according to "A World of Debt 2025".
  94. [94]
    Countries with the Highest National Debt 2025
    Japan has the second highest percentage of national debt in the world at 256.3% of its annual GDP, according to 2024 data, just behind Lebanon at almost 358%.
  95. [95]
    Global Debt Remains Above 235% of World GDP
    Sep 17, 2025 · In US dollar terms, total debt increased slightly to $251 trillion, with public debt rising to $99.2 trillion and private debt decreasing to ...
  96. [96]
    Aging Populations and Growing Public Debt Burdens—What Does ...
    Jun 3, 2024 · Populations in developed economies are aging. · A shrinking workforce and slower population growth will likely constrain economic activity.
  97. [97]
    Price/Earnings Ratio - Current Market Valuation
    Jun 30, 2025 · The current S&P500 10-year P/E Ratio is 37.1. This is 80.9% above the modern-era market average of 20.5, putting the current P/E 2.0 standard ...
  98. [98]
    P/E10 and Market Valuation: September 2025 - Advisor Perspectives
    Sep 25, 2025 · As of September 2025, the TTM P/E ratio is 28.4, and the P/E10 ratio is 38.6, the highest level since November 2021.
  99. [99]
    Do valuations correlate to long-term returns? Examining US equities ...
    Jan 23, 2025 · High starting valuations, particularly forward P/E ratios, tend to foreshadow lower long-term returns, while low valuations often signal higher returns.
  100. [100]
    Developed Markets Face Greater Political Risks Than Emerging ...
    Jul 17, 2024 · Political and geopolitical risks are escalating, challenging developed markets and creating potential opportunities for emerging markets debt investors.
  101. [101]
    Demographic divergence | BlackRock Investment Institute
    Aging populations in major economies are poised to limit how much countries can produce and grow, leaving governments with less tax revenue to support rising ...<|separator|>
  102. [102]
    MSCI Vs FTSE: Which is the best index provider? - DIY Investor
    Nov 24, 2024 · An ETF's results depend on its index. We explain the differences between the two major global index providers and why you shouldn't mix the two.<|separator|>
  103. [103]
    II. A Practical Comparison of Indexing Methods | A Tale of Two Indices
    Emerging markets are often more volatile than developed markets, and investing in emerging markets involves greater risks. Fixed income investments are ...
  104. [104]
    A Review of Market Categorization Research: An Evolutionary ...
    Jul 31, 2025 · Despite substantial advancements, research on market categorization remains fragmented, leading to inconsistent conceptualizations, theoretical ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms
  105. [105]
    Why “emerging markets” is an outdated definition
    Aug 4, 2015 · Developed markets hold $3.97tn, compared with $7.52tn for developing countries, according to IMF data. This leads to the curious situation in ...
  106. [106]
  107. [107]
    Why a MSCI Korea Upgrade to Developed Market Brings Investing ...
    May 30, 2023 · This can lead to a degree of subjectivity when deciding which countries deserve the prestigious developed label, analysts say.
  108. [108]
    S. Korea misses MSCI market upgrade again
    Jun 25, 2025 · South Korea has failed once again to secure an upgrade in market status from Morgan Stanley Capital International, which cited the need for further ...
  109. [109]
    Korea and Taiwan aren't developed enough for MSCI - CNBC
    Jun 10, 2014 · By most measures, South Korea and Taiwan look like fully developed countries, but the MSCI won't consider including them in developed market ...
  110. [110]
    FTSE Russell Publishes Semi-Annual Country Classification
    Aug 10, 2025 · Vietnam to be reclassified from Frontier to Secondary Emerging market status · Greece to be reclassified from Advanced Emerging to Developed ...
  111. [111]
    [PDF] Classifications of Countries Based on Their Level of Development
    The paper analyzes how the UNDP, the World Bank, and the IMF classify countries based on their level of development. These systems are found lacking in ...<|separator|>
  112. [112]
    Supporting emerging markets and developing economies in ... - OECD
    Jun 30, 2025 · It also highlights eight priority areas for reform: corporate governance, sovereign bond market development, state ownership practices, ...
  113. [113]
    [PDF] Policy Challenges for Emerging and Developing Economies
    One element of sound debt management is improved debt transparency, which has been associated with lower borrowing costs, increased foreign holdings, and lower ...
  114. [114]
    Good Policies (and Good Luck) Helped Emerging Economies Better ...
    Oct 6, 2025 · Stronger fiscal and monetary policy frameworks and more developed local currency debt markets have supported emerging market resilience.
  115. [115]
    [PDF] Political Risk in Emerging and Developed Markets
    Political risk represents a more important determinant of stock returns in emerging than in developed markets. Using analyst estimates of political risk, ...
  116. [116]
    FTSE vs. MSCI: Why Market Upgrades Are Not Created Equal
    This article explores the structural differences between the two major index providers—FTSE and MSCI—and explains why FTSE's reclassification tends to have ...
  117. [117]
    Chapter 13. Structural Reforms in Countries That Have Achieved ...
    It compares the effects of structural reforms in emerging market economies that enabled them to embark on a path to robust, inclusive, and sustainable growth.
  118. [118]
    [PDF] Investing in the Presence of Massive Flows: The Case of MSCI ...
    MSCI country return indexes are averages of a set of major stocks trading in the local market. Regional sub-indexes are averages of a set of country indexes.
  119. [119]
    Price effect and investor awareness: Evidence from MSCI Standard ...
    We find that markets react strongly to the MSCI announcements: additions have significantly positive abnormal returns while deletions have significantly ...
  120. [120]
    [PDF] International Asset Allocations and Capital Flows: The Benchmark ...
    Our results suggest that, through the reallocations they trigger, benchmark changes affect prices beyond the information content of upgrades/downgrades. The ...
  121. [121]
    In Practice Summary: Effect of Market Reclassifications on Share ...
    Apr 10, 2018 · This In Practice Summary gives a practitioner's perspective on one article exploring the effect of market reclassification on share prices.