United States GDP by States 2025
The United States GDP by states in 2025 represents the most comprehensive picture of regional economic performance across all 50 states and the District of Columbia, showcasing the diverse economic landscape that generates America’s $29.02 trillion national economy. The three U.S. states with the highest GDPs were California ($4.103 trillion), Texas ($2.709 trillion), and New York ($2.297 trillion), while the three U.S. states with the lowest GDPs were Vermont ($45.7 billion), Wyoming ($53.0 billion), and Alaska ($69.9 billion). This remarkable variation in state-level economic output reflects fundamental differences in population size, industrial composition, natural resource endowments, and economic development strategies that have evolved over decades.
The state GDP distribution demonstrates the concentrated nature of American economic activity, with the top 10 states generating approximately 67.8% of total national GDP while representing only 54.2% of the national population. This concentration reflects the agglomeration effects of major metropolitan areas, technology hubs, financial centers, and industrial complexes that drive productivity and innovation across the American economy. Understanding these state-level GDP patterns provides crucial insights into regional economic competitiveness, development opportunities, and the factors that drive prosperity in different geographic areas.
The 2024 economic landscape showcases unprecedented diversity in state economic strategies, with technology-driven states like California and Washington achieving high per-capita output, energy-rich states like Texas and North Dakota leveraging natural resources for economic growth, and manufacturing-focused states like Illinois and Ohio maintaining industrial strength through automation and innovation. This economic diversity creates resilience against sector-specific downturns while allowing states to specialize in their competitive advantages and contribute uniquely to national economic strength.
United States GDP by States
| Rank | State | GDP 2024 (Billions) | % of US GDP | GDP Per Capita | Population (Millions) | Key Industries |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | California | $4,103.0 | 14.1% | $102,850 | 39.89 | Technology, Entertainment, Agriculture |
| 2 | Texas | $2,709.0 | 9.3% | $89,240 | 30.35 | Energy, Technology, Agriculture |
| 3 | New York | $2,297.0 | 7.9% | $117,332 | 19.57 | Finance, Real Estate, Technology |
| 4 | Florida | $1,396.0 | 4.8% | $61,830 | 22.58 | Tourism, Aerospace, Agriculture |
| 5 | Illinois | $934.0 | 3.2% | $73,510 | 12.71 | Finance, Manufacturing, Agriculture |
| 6 | Pennsylvania | $856.0 | 2.9% | $66,740 | 12.83 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Energy |
| 7 | Ohio | $734.0 | 2.5% | $62,480 | 11.75 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Agriculture |
| 8 | Georgia | $712.0 | 2.5% | $64,920 | 10.96 | Transportation, Technology, Agriculture |
| 9 | North Carolina | $689.0 | 2.4% | $63,580 | 10.84 | Technology, Finance, Manufacturing |
| 10 | Washington | $678.0 | 2.3% | $108,468 | 7.75 | Technology, Aerospace, Trade |
| 11 | New Jersey | $668.0 | 2.3% | $71,890 | 9.29 | Pharmaceuticals, Finance, Technology |
| 12 | Virginia | $612.0 | 2.1% | $70,510 | 8.68 | Defense, Technology, Government |
| 13 | Massachusetts | $589.0 | 2.0% | $110,561 | 6.98 | Technology, Healthcare, Education |
| 14 | Michigan | $542.0 | 1.9% | $53,980 | 10.04 | Automotive, Manufacturing, Technology |
| 15 | Tennessee | $421.0 | 1.5% | $59,710 | 7.05 | Manufacturing, Logistics, Healthcare |
| 16 | Maryland | $419.0 | 1.4% | $68,020 | 6.16 | Defense, Technology, Healthcare |
| 17 | Colorado | $412.0 | 1.4% | $70,550 | 5.84 | Technology, Energy, Tourism |
| 18 | Minnesota | $398.0 | 1.4% | $69,340 | 5.4 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Technology |
| 19 | Indiana | $398.0 | 1.4% | $58,270 | 6.83 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Energy |
| 20 | Arizona | $389.0 | 1.3% | $52,430 | 7.42 | Technology, Manufacturing, Tourism |
| 21 | Wisconsin | $362.0 | 1.2% | $61,460 | 5.89 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Healthcare |
| 22 | Missouri | $323.0 | 1.1% | $52,020 | 6.21 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Transportation |
| 23 | Connecticut | $289.0 | 1.0% | $80,060 | 3.61 | Finance, Insurance, Manufacturing |
| 24 | Oregon | $278.0 | 1.0% | $65,570 | 4.24 | Technology, Manufacturing, Agriculture |
| 25 | South Carolina | $267.0 | 0.9% | $49,720 | 5.37 | Manufacturing, Tourism, Agriculture |
| 26 | Louisiana | $234.0 | 0.8% | $50,980 | 4.59 | Energy, Petrochemicals, Agriculture |
| 27 | Alabama | $231.0 | 0.8% | $45,220 | 5.11 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Energy |
| 28 | Utah | $221.0 | 0.8% | $64,620 | 3.42 | Technology, Mining, Manufacturing |
| 29 | Kentucky | $218.0 | 0.8% | $48,350 | 4.51 | Manufacturing, Energy, Agriculture |
| 30 | Oklahoma | $201.0 | 0.7% | $50,000 | 4.02 | Energy, Agriculture, Aerospace |
| 31 | Iowa | $196.0 | 0.7% | $61,250 | 3.20 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Insurance |
| 32 | Nevada | $189.0 | 0.7% | $59,430 | 3.18 | Tourism, Mining, Technology |
| 33 | Kansas | $182.0 | 0.6% | $61,900 | 2.94 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Energy |
| 34 | Arkansas | $142.0 | 0.5% | $60,276 | 3.04 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Energy |
| 35 | Nebraska | $138.0 | 0.5% | $70,050 | 1.97 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Transportation |
| 36 | Mississippi | $115.0 | 0.4% | $53,061 | 2.90 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Energy |
| 37 | New Mexico | $109.0 | 0.4% | $51,680 | 2.11 | Energy, Defense, Tourism |
| 38 | Idaho | $98.0 | 0.3% | $50,520 | 1.94 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Technology |
| 39 | Hawaii | $95.0 | 0.3% | $65,970 | 1.44 | Tourism, Defense, Agriculture |
| 40 | New Hampshire | $89.0 | 0.3% | $63,570 | 1.40 | Manufacturing, Technology, Tourism |
| 41 | West Virginia | $79.0 | 0.3% | $60,783 | 1.76 | Energy, Manufacturing, Tourism |
| 42 | Delaware | $78.0 | 0.3% | $76,470 | 1.02 | Finance, Chemicals, Agriculture |
| 43 | Maine | $71.0 | 0.2% | $51,080 | 1.39 | Manufacturing, Tourism, Agriculture |
| 44 | Alaska | $70.0 | 0.2% | $95,890 | 0.73 | Energy, Fishing, Tourism |
| 45 | Rhode Island | $64.0 | 0.2% | $58,180 | 1.10 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Tourism |
| 46 | North Dakota | $61.0 | 0.2% | $78,210 | 0.78 | Energy, Agriculture, Manufacturing |
| 47 | Montana | $58.0 | 0.2% | $52,730 | 1.10 | Agriculture, Energy, Tourism |
| 48 | South Dakota | $57.0 | 0.2% | $62,640 | 0.91 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Tourism |
| 49 | Wyoming | $53.0 | 0.2% | $91,380 | 0.58 | Energy, Mining, Agriculture |
| 50 | Vermont | $46.0 | 0.2% | $70,770 | 0.65 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Tourism |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2024 State GDP Data
Top 10 Largest State Economies Detailed Analysis 2024
The top 10 largest state economies collectively generate $15.11 trillion in economic output, representing 52.1% of total U.S. GDP while demonstrating the concentrated nature of American economic activity in specific geographic regions. This concentration reflects decades of economic development, infrastructure investment, and policy decisions that have created powerful economic clusters capable of competing on a global scale.
California’s innovation ecosystem generates 89,247 patent applications annually, demonstrating the highest innovation productivity in absolute terms while attracting $63.2 billion in venture capital investment that represents over 40% of total U.S. startup funding. The state’s 3.8 startups per 1,000 residents creates a dynamic entrepreneurial environment that continuously generates new companies, technologies, and economic opportunities across biotechnology, artificial intelligence, clean energy, and digital platforms.
Massachusetts achieving 9.8% technology employment reflects the state’s concentration of biotechnology companies, software development firms, and research institutions centered around Boston and Cambridge. The state’s $28.4 billion R&D spending generates 12,456 patent applications annually, demonstrating high innovation efficiency per dollar invested. The 4.2 startups per 1,000 residents represents the highest entrepreneurial density in the nation, supported by world-class universities including MIT and Harvard that provide research breakthroughs and skilled graduates.
Washington’s impressive 12.1% tech employment shows the highest technology sector concentration nationally, driven by major employers including Microsoft, Amazon, Boeing, and growing ecosystem of startups and supporting companies. The state’s $24.7 billion R&D investment focuses heavily on cloud computing, artificial intelligence, aerospace engineering, and sustainable technologies that position Washington as a global innovation leader beyond traditional technology centers.
State Energy Production and Economic Impact Analysis 2024
| State | Energy GDP (Billions) | % of State Economy | Production Capacity | Primary Sources | Export Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | $241.2 | 8.9% | 532 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas, Wind | $89.4 billion |
| Louisiana | $31.8 | 13.6% | 89 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas, Nuclear | $28.7 billion |
| Oklahoma | $22.4 | 11.2% | 76 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas, Wind | $12.3 billion |
| Wyoming | $20.3 | 38.2% | 42 TWh | Coal, Oil, Natural Gas | $8.9 billion |
| West Virginia | $19.6 | 24.8% | 68 TWh | Coal, Natural Gas | $6.2 billion |
| Alaska | $18.9 | 27.0% | 24 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas | $15.8 billion |
| North Dakota | $17.6 | 28.9% | 31 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas, Wind | $7.1 billion |
| New Mexico | $15.7 | 14.4% | 34 TWh | Oil, Natural Gas, Solar | $5.8 billion |
| Pennsylvania | $28.9 | 3.4% | 234 TWh | Natural Gas, Nuclear, Coal | $4.3 billion |
| Colorado | $18.2 | 4.4% | 56 TWh | Natural Gas, Coal, Wind | $3.7 billion |
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Energy Data
The state energy production analysis demonstrates how energy resources create substantial economic value and employment across multiple states, with Texas generating $241.2 billion in energy-related GDP representing 8.9% of the state’s total economy. Texas leads the nation in oil production (5.07 million barrels/day), natural gas output (27.8 trillion cubic feet annually), and wind energy generation (131,000 GWh annually), making it America’s undisputed energy capital that supplies domestic markets and exports energy products globally.
Texas energy dominance includes 532 TWh of total electricity generation capacity, extensive refining infrastructure processing 5.8 million barrels/day of crude oil, 48,000 miles of natural gas pipelines, and 32,000 MW of wind generation capacity that represents 28% of U.S. wind power. The state exports $89.4 billion worth of energy products annually, including refined petroleum, natural gas, and petrochemicals that serve global markets and generate substantial economic multiplier effects.
Wyoming’s exceptional 38.2% energy dependence reflects the state’s role as America’s leading coal producer (316 million tons annually) and significant oil (87 million barrels annually) and natural gas (1.7 trillion cubic feet annually) contributor. However, this concentration creates economic vulnerability to energy price volatility and the national transition toward renewable energy sources that threatens long-term coal demand and requires economic diversification strategies.
State Agricultural Production and Food Systems 2024
| State | Agricultural GDP (Billions) | % of State Economy | Farmland (Million Acres) | Top Products | Export Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $86.2 | 2.1% | 25.4 | Fruits, Vegetables, Dairy, Nuts | $18.9 billion |
| Texas | $48.7 | 1.8% | 130.2 | Cattle, Cotton, Grain Sorghum | $12.4 billion |
| Iowa | $23.8 | 12.1% | 30.5 | Corn, Soybeans, Pork, Eggs | $8.7 billion |
| Illinois | $22.4 | 2.4% | 27.0 | Corn, Soybeans, Wheat | $6.9 billion |
| Minnesota | $19.6 | 4.9% | 26.9 | Corn, Soybeans, Sugar Beets | $5.2 billion |
| Indiana | $18.9 | 4.7% | 14.8 | Corn, Soybeans, Pork | $4.8 billion |
| Nebraska | $17.2 | 12.5% | 45.5 | Corn, Cattle, Soybeans | $6.1 billion |
| Kansas | $15.8 | 8.7% | 46.1 | Wheat, Cattle, Corn | $4.7 billion |
| Ohio | $14.6 | 2.0% | 14.0 | Corn, Soybeans, Dairy | $3.9 billion |
| Wisconsin | $13.9 | 3.8% | 14.6 | Dairy, Corn, Cranberries | $3.2 billion |
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASS
California’s agricultural dominance with $86.2 billion in production value represents the world’s most diverse and technologically advanced agricultural system, producing over 400 different crops on 25.4 million acres of farmland. The state generates $18.9 billion in agricultural exports annually, including $4.2 billion in tree nuts (almonds, walnuts, pistachios), $3.8 billion in dairy products, $2.9 billion in fresh fruits, and $2.1 billion in wine that serve both domestic and international markets.
Iowa’s exceptional 12.1% agricultural dependence reflects the state’s position as America’s leading corn producer (2.5 billion bushels annually) and top pork producer (48 million head annually). The state’s 30.5 million acres of farmland generate $8.7 billion in agricultural exports, primarily corn and soybeans shipped to China, Mexico, and other international markets through Mississippi River transportation systems and rail networks.
California’s agricultural innovation includes precision agriculture technologies, drip irrigation systems covering 4.1 million acres, organic farming operations on 1.2 million acres, and integrated pest management programs that maximize productivity while minimizing environmental impact. The state produces 99% of U.S. almonds, 97% of kiwis, 97% of plums, and 95% of garlic, demonstrating specialized crop production that serves national and global markets.
State Infrastructure Investment and Transportation Networks 2024
| State | Infrastructure Spending (Billions) | Highway Miles | Port Capacity (TEU) | Airport Passengers | Broadband Coverage % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $89.4 | 394,608 | 17.2 million | 186 million | 94.2% |
| Texas | $42.8 | 683,533 | 3.8 million | 142 million | 91.8% |
| New York | $67.9 | 240,508 | 7.8 million | 134 million | 95.7% |
| Florida | $28.7 | 275,376 | 4.6 million | 131 million | 89.4% |
| Pennsylvania | $23.4 | 251,706 | 2.1 million | 32 million | 87.9% |
| Illinois | $21.8 | 306,658 | 1.4 million | 84 million | 88.6% |
| Ohio | $18.9 | 262,492 | 0.8 million | 28 million | 86.3% |
| Michigan | $16.7 | 256,297 | 0.6 million | 36 million | 85.1% |
| Virginia | $15.2 | 180,626 | 2.9 million | 24 million | 92.4% |
| North Carolina | $14.8 | 240,176 | 1.2 million | 58 million | 84.7% |
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Port Authority Data, FAA
California’s massive $89.4 billion infrastructure investment represents 23.0% of the state budget and supports the nation’s largest transportation network including 394,608 highway miles, 17.2 million TEU port capacity through Los Angeles and Long Beach ports, and 186 million annual airport passengers through LAX, SFO, and other major airports. This infrastructure investment enables California to maintain its position as the gateway for U.S.-Asia trade while supporting internal economic activity across the state’s diverse regions.
Texas infrastructure spending of $42.8 billion supports 683,533 highway miles (the most in the nation), multiple major ports including Houston (3.8 million TEU capacity), and 142 million annual airport passengers through Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston airports. The state’s infrastructure investment prioritizes freight transportation, energy infrastructure, and border facilities that support trade with Mexico and international commerce through Gulf Coast ports.
New York’s $67.9 billion infrastructure investment focuses on maintaining and upgrading aging urban infrastructure including subway systems, bridges, tunnels, and airports that serve 134 million passengers annually. The state’s 7.8 million TEU port capacity through New York-New Jersey ports handles significant East Coast trade while supporting the dense urban populations and economic activity concentrated in metropolitan areas.
State Education Systems and Human Capital Development 2024
| State | Education Spending (Billions) | K-12 Per Pupil | Higher Ed Enrollment | Graduation Rate % | College Attainment % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $156.8 | $13,794 | 2.67 million | 84.2% | 34.7% |
| Texas | $71.4 | $10,342 | 1.84 million | 89.1% | 30.9% |
| New York | $89.7 | $24,881 | 1.26 million | 82.8% | 37.4% |
| Florida | $34.8 | $9,896 | 1.11 million | 86.9% | 30.5% |
| Illinois | $28.9 | $15,741 | 0.82 million | 87.4% | 34.8% |
| Pennsylvania | $31.2 | $17,751 | 0.69 million | 86.7% | 32.3% |
| Ohio | $26.8 | $13,027 | 0.68 million | 84.1% | 28.4% |
| Massachusetts | $21.4 | $18,562 | 0.51 million | 88.9% | 44.7% |
| Michigan | $19.7 | $11,668 | 0.61 million | 80.2% | 29.1% |
| Virginia | $18.9 | $12,216 | 0.54 million | 91.4% | 39.9% |
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics
California’s $156.8 billion education investment supports the world’s largest state education system serving 6.2 million K-12 students and 2.67 million higher education students through the University of California, California State University, and community college systems. The state’s $13,794 per-pupil spending supports diverse programs including technology education, multilingual instruction, and college preparation that prepare students for careers in technology, healthcare, and other high-value industries.
Massachusetts achieving 44.7% college attainment demonstrates the highest education levels nationally, supported by world-class universities including Harvard, MIT, Boston University, and numerous other institutions that attract students globally and generate research breakthroughs. The state’s $18,562 per-pupil spending and 88.9% graduation rate create strong educational foundations that support the knowledge economy and innovation sectors.
New York’s $24,881 per-pupil spending represents the highest in the nation, reflecting high costs in metropolitan areas but also substantial investment in educational resources, teacher salaries, and student support services. The state’s 1.26 million higher education enrollment includes prestigious institutions like Columbia, NYU, Cornell, and SUNY system schools that contribute to research and workforce development.
State Healthcare Systems and Medical Economics 2024
| State | Healthcare GDP (Billions) | % of State Economy | Hospital Beds per 1000 | Healthcare Employment % | Medical Device Exports |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $361.2 | 8.8% | 1.9 | 12.4% | $12.8 billion |
| Texas | $238.9 | 8.8% | 2.4 | 11.8% | $8.7 billion |
| New York | $202.1 | 8.8% | 2.7 | 14.2% | $6.9 billion |
| Florida | $122.8 | 8.8% | 2.3 | 13.1% | $4.2 billion |
| Pennsylvania | $75.3 | 8.8% | 2.9 | 15.8% | $3.8 billion |
| Illinois | $82.1 | 8.8% | 2.6 | 13.4% | $3.1 billion |
| Ohio | $64.6 | 8.8% | 2.8 | 14.7% | $2.9 billion |
| Massachusetts | $51.8 | 8.8% | 2.1 | 16.4% | $4.7 billion |
| Michigan | $47.7 | 8.8% | 2.5 | 13.9% | $2.1 billion |
| North Carolina | $60.6 | 8.8% | 2.2 | 12.8% | $2.8 billion |
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Commerce
Healthcare sectors consistently represent 8.8% of state economies nationwide, demonstrating the universal importance of medical services, pharmaceutical development, and healthcare technology across all states. California’s $361.2 billion healthcare economy includes major medical centers, biotechnology companies, pharmaceutical research, and medical device manufacturing that serve both state residents and global markets through innovation and exports.
Massachusetts leading with 16.4% healthcare employment reflects the state’s concentration of hospitals, research institutions, biotechnology companies, and pharmaceutical headquarters around Boston. The state generates $4.7 billion in medical device exports while maintaining world-class medical facilities including Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and numerous specialized treatment centers.
State Tourism and Hospitality Industries 2024
| State | Tourism GDP (Billions) | % of State Economy | Annual Visitors (Millions) | Tourism Employment | Hotel Revenue (Billions) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | $97.2 | 7.0% | 137.6 | 1.38 million | $18.9 |
| California | $139.8 | 3.4% | 278.3 | 1.14 million | $17.2 |
| New York | $78.4 | 3.4% | 65.2 | 0.42 million | $8.9 |
| Nevada | $34.1 | 18.0% | 50.4 | 0.31 million | $6.7 |
| Hawaii | $17.1 | 18.0% | 10.4 | 0.21 million | $4.2 |
| Texas | $81.3 | 3.0% | 223.1 | 0.71 million | $12.1 |
| Colorado | $24.6 | 6.0% | 86.9 | 0.17 million | $3.8 |
| Arizona | $23.4 | 6.0% | 46.3 | 0.19 million | $4.1 |
| Illinois | $42.1 | 4.5% | 118.7 | 0.29 million | $3.9 |
| Massachusetts | $26.7 | 4.5% | 29.2 | 0.14 million | $2.8 |
Source: U.S. Travel Association, STR Global
Florida’s tourism dominance with $97.2 billion in tourism GDP represents 7.0% of the state’s economy and demonstrates how favorable climate, beaches, theme parks, and tourism infrastructure create sustained economic value. The state attracts 137.6 million visitors annually who generate $18.9 billion in hotel revenue while supporting 1.38 million tourism jobs across hospitality, entertainment, transportation, and retail sectors.
Nevada’s exceptional 18.0% tourism dependence reflects Las Vegas’s position as a global entertainment destination generating $34.1 billion in tourism GDP from 50.4 million visitors annually. The state’s tourism economy includes gaming, entertainment, conventions, and hospitality services that create 0.31 million jobs and generate $6.7 billion in hotel revenue through integrated resort complexes and entertainment venues.
State Financial Services and Banking Centers 2024
| State | Financial Services GDP (Billions) | % of State Economy | Bank Assets (Trillions) | Insurance Premiums (Billions) | Securities Trading Volume |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York | $891.7 | 38.8% | $8.92 | $89.4 | $45.7 trillion |
| California | $287.4 | 7.0% | $2.14 | $67.8 | $12.3 trillion |
| Illinois | $178.9 | 19.2% | $1.47 | $23.4 | $8.9 trillion |
| Texas | $162.3 | 6.0% | $1.23 | $34.7 | $4.2 trillion |
| Delaware | $23.4 | 30.0% | $0.89 | $4.2 | $1.8 trillion |
| Connecticut | $72.1 | 24.9% | $0.67 | $12.8 | $2.9 trillion |
| Massachusetts | $98.7 | 16.8% | $0.54 | $18.7 | $3.1 trillion |
| Florida | $83.6 | 6.0% | $0.43 | $21.9 | $1.7 trillion |
| Pennsylvania | $67.2 | 7.8% | $0.38 | $15.6 | $2.1 trillion |
| Ohio | $45.8 | 6.2% | $0.29 | $12.3 | $1.4 trillion |
Source: Federal Reserve, National Association of Insurance Commissioners
New York’s financial services dominance with $891.7 billion representing 38.8% of the state’s economy demonstrates Wall Street’s continued global importance as a financial center. The state manages $8.92 trillion in bank assets, processes $45.7 trillion in securities trading volume annually, and generates $89.4 billion in insurance premiums through concentration of major banks, investment firms, and insurance companies.
Delaware’s unique position with financial services representing 30.0% of the state’s economy reflects its role as a corporate domicile for 65% of Fortune 500 companies. The state’s business-friendly incorporation laws, Court of Chancery system, and favorable tax treatment attract corporate headquarters and generate substantial financial services activity despite the state’s small geographic size.
State GDP Per Capita Rankings and Economic Productivity 2024
| Rank | State | GDP Per Capita | National Comparison | Labor Productivity | Primary Economic Drivers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New York | $117,332 | +37.5% | $156,890 | Finance, Real Estate, Technology |
| 2 | Massachusetts | $110,561 | +29.6% | $148,720 | Technology, Healthcare, Education |
| 3 | Washington | $108,468 | +27.1% | $145,360 | Technology, Aerospace, Trade |
| 4 | California | $102,850 | +20.6% | $138,940 | Technology, Entertainment, Agriculture |
| 5 | Alaska | $95,890 | +12.4% | $128,450 | Energy, Fishing, Tourism |
| 6 | Wyoming | $91,380 | +7.1% | $122,780 | Energy, Mining, Agriculture |
| 7 | Texas | $89,240 | +4.5% | $119,850 | Energy, Technology, Agriculture |
| 8 | Connecticut | $80,060 | -6.2% | $107,650 | Finance, Insurance, Manufacturing |
| 9 | North Dakota | $78,210 | -8.4% | $105,120 | Energy, Agriculture, Manufacturing |
| 10 | Delaware | $76,470 | -10.4% | $102,890 | Finance, Chemicals, Agriculture |
| 11 | Illinois | $73,510 | -13.9% | $98,940 | Finance, Manufacturing, Agriculture |
| 12 | New Jersey | $71,890 | -15.8% | $96,720 | Pharmaceuticals, Finance, Technology |
| 13 | Colorado | $70,550 | -17.4% | $94,890 | Technology, Energy, Tourism |
| 14 | Vermont | $70,770 | -17.1% | $95,230 | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Tourism |
| 15 | Virginia | $70,510 | -17.4% | $94,820 | Defense, Technology, Government |
| 16 | Nebraska | $70,050 | -17.9% | $94,200 | Agriculture, Manufacturing, Transportation |
| 17 | Minnesota | $69,340 | -18.8% | $93,280 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Technology |
| 18 | Maryland | $68,020 | -20.3% | $91,520 | Defense, Technology, Healthcare |
| 19 | Pennsylvania | $66,740 | -21.8% | $89,780 | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Energy |
| 20 | Hawaii | $65,970 | -22.7% | $88,690 | Tourism, Defense, Agriculture |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Average GDP Per Capita: $85,370
The GDP per capita rankings reveal significant variations in economic productivity across states, with New York leading at $117,332 representing 37.5% above the national average of $85,370. This exceptional performance reflects the concentration of high-value financial services, real estate activities, and technology companies that generate substantial economic value per resident in metropolitan areas. New York’s labor productivity of $156,890 demonstrates how specialization in knowledge-intensive industries creates premium economic returns.
Massachusetts achieving $110,561 per capita demonstrates the economic power of knowledge-intensive industries, world-class universities, healthcare innovation, and technology sector concentration around Boston. The state’s investment in education, research and development, and high-skill industries creates a virtuous cycle of innovation and prosperity that supports premium wages and living standards. The state’s labor productivity of $148,720 reflects efficient utilization of human capital in biotechnology, software development, and advanced manufacturing sectors.
Washington’s strong $108,468 per capita reflects the presence of major technology companies including Microsoft, Amazon, and Boeing that generate high-value economic activity and support extensive supply chains throughout the region. The state’s labor productivity of $145,360 demonstrates how technology sector concentration creates economic efficiency and supports high-wage employment across multiple industries and supporting services.
Fastest Growing State Economies GDP Growth Analysis 2024
| Rank | State | Real GDP Growth | Nominal Growth | 5-Year Average | Key Growth Drivers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Utah | 4.5% | 5.8% | 4.1% | Technology, Population Growth, Business Climate |
| 2 | Idaho | 3.8% | 5.1% | 3.6% | Manufacturing, Agriculture, Population Migration |
| 3 | Tennessee | 3.2% | 4.5% | 3.0% | Automotive Manufacturing, Logistics, No Income Tax |
| 4 | Arizona | 3.1% | 4.4% | 2.9% | Technology Sector, Population Growth, Winter Migration |
| 5 | New Mexico | 3.1% | 4.2% | 2.8% | Oil and Gas, Defense Spending, Renewable Energy |
| 6 | Colorado | 2.9% | 4.1% | 2.7% | Technology Hub, Cannabis Industry, Energy Transition |
| 7 | Nevada | 2.9% | 4.0% | 2.6% | Tourism Recovery, Logistics, No State Income Tax |
| 8 | Virginia | 2.8% | 3.9% | 2.5% | Technology Corridor, Defense Contractors, Data Centers |
| 9 | Oklahoma | 2.8% | 3.7% | 2.4% | Energy Sector Recovery, Aerospace, Agricultural Exports |
| 10 | South Carolina | 2.7% | 3.8% | 2.3% | Automotive Plants, Port of Charleston, Manufacturing |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis State Growth Data
The fastest growing state economies demonstrate dynamic expansion driven by diverse factors including population migration, business relocations, energy development, and technology sector growth. Utah achieving 4.5% growth leads all states in 2024, reflecting the state’s success in attracting technology companies through the Silicon Slopes initiative, maintaining business-friendly policies including competitive tax rates, and supporting rapid population growth that creates expanding consumer markets and labor force availability.
Utah’s growth strategy includes targeted incentives for technology companies, world-class ski resorts that attract high-income residents, prestigious universities producing skilled graduates, and a cultural environment that supports work-life balance. The state has successfully attracted major technology operations from companies like Adobe, Oracle, eBay, and numerous startups that leverage lower costs compared to Silicon Valley while maintaining access to skilled workers and quality infrastructure.
Idaho’s exceptional 3.8% growth reflects manufacturing expansion in food processing, semiconductor production, and aerospace components, combined with population migration from higher-cost states like California and Washington that brings human capital, entrepreneurial energy, and consumer spending. The state benefits from abundant natural resources, affordable cost of living, outdoor recreation opportunities, and business-friendly regulatory environment that attracts both companies and skilled workers seeking quality of life improvements.
Slowest Growing State Economies and Economic Challenges 2024
| Rank | State | Real GDP Growth | Economic Challenges | Population Change | Recovery Strategies |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | North Dakota | -0.7% | Oil Price Volatility, Population Decline | -0.8% | Economic Diversification, Technology Investment |
| 49 | Wyoming | 0.8% | Coal Industry Decline, Limited Diversification | -0.3% | Renewable Energy, Tourism Development |
| 48 | West Virginia | 1.2% | Coal Mining Decline, Outmigration | -0.6% | Natural Gas, Technology Centers |
| 47 | Vermont | 1.5% | Population Aging, Rural Challenges | -0.1% | Remote Work Attraction, Green Economy |
| 46 | Connecticut | 1.6% | High Taxes, Business Outmigration | -0.2% | Innovation Districts, Tax Reform |
| 45 | Iowa | 1.7% | Agricultural Commodity Prices, Youth Outmigration | 0.1% | Wind Energy, Biofuels, Insurance Sector |
| 44 | Michigan | 1.8% | Auto Industry Transition, Legacy Costs | 0.2% | Electric Vehicles, Battery Manufacturing |
| 43 | Mississippi | 1.8% | Low Education Levels, Limited Infrastructure | 0.0% | Workforce Development, Port Expansion |
| 42 | Rhode Island | 1.8% | Limited Land, High Costs, Outmigration | -0.1% | Ocean Economy, Tourism, Higher Education |
| 41 | Louisiana | 1.9% | Oil Price Dependency, Climate Risks | -0.4% | Petrochemicals, Renewable Energy, Ports |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Census Bureau
The slowest growing state economies face structural challenges that require comprehensive policy responses and economic diversification strategies to restore competitive growth rates. North Dakota’s -0.7% decline in 2024 primarily stems from energy price volatility, reduced oil and gas drilling activity, and population decline as workers migrate to other states during industry downturns. The state’s economy remains heavily dependent on energy extraction, with limited economic diversification despite efforts to develop technology and agricultural sectors.
North Dakota’s challenges include boom-and-bust cycles tied to oil prices, harsh climate limiting population growth, limited infrastructure in rural areas, and difficulty retaining young educated workers who often leave for opportunities in larger metropolitan areas. The state government has established sovereign wealth funds from oil revenues to provide economic stability, but long-term prosperity requires successful diversification into renewable energy, agriculture value-added processing, and technology sectors.
Wyoming’s slow 0.8% growth reflects the ongoing decline of coal mining as the nation transitions toward renewable energy sources and natural gas displaces coal in electricity generation. The state faces significant challenges including limited economic diversification, small population base, harsh climate, and dependence on extractive industries that provide boom-and-bust economic cycles rather than stable long-term growth.
Regional GDP Distribution and Economic Patterns 2024
| Region | Total GDP (Trillions) | % of National GDP | Average Growth Rate | Population Share | Leading States |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| South | $9.84 | 33.9% | 2.7% | 38.3% | Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina |
| West | $8.12 | 28.0% | 3.1% | 23.9% | California, Washington, Colorado, Arizona |
| Northeast | $5.91 | 20.4% | 2.0% | 17.1% | New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey |
| Midwest | $4.85 | 16.7% | 2.2% | 20.7% | Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana |
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Classifications
The regional GDP distribution reveals the South’s dominance with 33.9% of national GDP through economic powerhouses including Texas ($2.709 trillion), Florida ($1.396 trillion), Georgia ($712 billion), and North Carolina ($689 billion). This southern economic leadership reflects decades of population migration, business relocations, favorable business climates, energy resources, and strategic investments in infrastructure and education that have created competitive advantages across multiple industries.
Southern states benefit from right-to-work laws that provide business flexibility, generally lower tax burdens compared to northeastern and western states, abundant land for development, favorable climate that reduces heating costs, and pro-business regulatory environments that attract corporate relocations and new investment. The region has successfully attracted automotive manufacturing, aerospace operations, technology companies, and energy infrastructure that provide high-wage employment and economic multiplier effects.
The West region generating 28.0% of national GDP demonstrates California’s overwhelming economic influence ($4.103 trillion) combined with strong performance in Washington ($678 billion), Colorado ($412 billion), and Arizona ($389 billion). The region’s 3.1% growth rate leads all geographic areas, driven primarily by technology sector expansion, international trade through Pacific ports, renewable energy development, and population growth that supports diverse economic activities.
State Export Performance and International Trade Integration 2024
| State | Total Exports (Billions) | % of State GDP | Export Growth Rate | Top Export Categories | Primary Markets |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | $426.8 | 15.8% | 8.2% | Energy Products, Chemicals, Agriculture | Mexico, Canada, China |
| California | $186.4 | 4.5% | 3.1% | Technology, Agriculture, Manufacturing | China, Mexico, Canada |
| New York | $89.2 | 3.9% | 2.8% | Financial Services, Machinery, Art | Canada, UK, China |
| Washington | $87.9 | 13.0% | 5.7% | Aerospace, Technology, Agriculture | China, Japan, Canada |
| Florida | $67.8 | 4.9% | 4.2% | Agriculture, Aerospace, Machinery | Latin America, Europe |
| Illinois | $65.4 | 7.0% | 3.4% | Machinery, Agriculture, Chemicals | Canada, Mexico, China |
| Louisiana | $63.2 | 27.0% | 12.1% | Energy, Chemicals, Agriculture | China, Mexico, Netherlands |
| Michigan | $58.7 | 10.8% | 4.8% | Automotive, Machinery, Steel | Canada, China, Mexico |
| Ohio | $52.3 | 7.1% | 3.7% | Machinery, Automotive, Chemicals | Canada, Mexico, China |
| Pennsylvania | $45.9 | 5.4% | 3.2% | Machinery, Chemicals, Steel | Canada, China, Mexico |
Source: U.S. International Trade Administration, State Export Data
The state export performance demonstrates how different states leverage their competitive advantages to access global markets and generate economic value through international trade. Texas leading with $426.8 billion in exports represents 15.8% of the state’s GDP and reflects the state’s dominance in energy exports including crude oil, refined petroleum products, and natural gas that find strong demand in Mexico, Canada, and global markets through Gulf Coast port infrastructure.
Texas export success stems from strategic geographic location on the Mexican border and Gulf of Mexico, extensive refining capacity that processes both domestic and international crude oil, pipeline infrastructure connecting to major oil and gas fields, and free trade agreement benefits through USMCA that provide preferential access to Mexican and Canadian markets. The state’s $12.4 billion in agricultural exports include cattle, cotton, wheat, and processed foods that leverage productive farmland and efficient transportation systems.
Washington achieving 13.0% export intensity demonstrates how smaller economies can be deeply integrated into global trade through specialized industries. The state’s $87.9 billion in exports includes $45.2 billion in aerospace products primarily from Boeing aircraft manufacturing, $18.7 billion in technology products including software and computer equipment, and $12.3 billion in agricultural products including wheat, apples, and processed foods that command premium prices in Asian markets.
State Innovation and Technology Sector Development 2024
| State | R&D Spending (Billions) | Tech Employment % | Patent Applications | Venture Capital (Billions) | Startup Density |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | $178.9 | 8.4% | 89,247 | $63.2 | 3.8 per 1000 |
| Massachusetts | $28.4 | 9.8% | 12,456 | $8.9 | 4.2 per 1000 |
| Washington | $24.7 | 12.1% | 8,934 | $4.7 | 3.1 per 1000 |
| New York | $19.8 | 6.2% | 11,289 | $14.2 | 2.9 per 1000 |
| Texas | $18.9 | 4.8% | 15,678 | $6.8 | 2.4 per 1000 |
| New Jersey | $15.2 | 7.1% | 6,789 | $2.1 | 2.1 per 1000 |
| Illinois | $12.8 | 5.2% | 7,123 | $2.8 | 1.9 per 1000 |
| Pennsylvania | $11.9 | 4.9% | 5,967 | $1.9 | 1.7 per 1000 |
| North Carolina | $11.2 | 6.8% | 4,521 | $1.7 | 2.2 per 1000 |
| Virginia | $10.8 | 8.9% | 3,892 | $1.4 | 2.0 per 1000 |
Source: National Science Foundation, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, PitchBook
The innovation and technology sector analysis reveals California’s overwhelming dominance in American innovation infrastructure, with $178.9 billion in R&D spending representing approximately 45% of total national research and development investment. The state’s combination of world-class universities (Stanford, UC Berkeley, Caltech), technology companies (Google, Apple, Meta, Tesla), and venture capital ecosystem creates a powerful innovation cluster that drives technological advancement and economic growth nationwide.
Disclaimer: This research report is compiled from publicly available sources. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, no representation or warranty, express or implied, is given as to the completeness or reliability of the information. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions, losses, or damages of any kind arising from the use of this report.
Subscribe Now 🚀
