MONEY SUPPLY BY COUNTRY

Money Supply by Country, Ranked in USD

China holds the largest money supply of any economy we track: $42.64T (2024), converted to USD from the World Bank’s annual FM.LBL.BMNY.CN series. The United States is second at $30.68T (2025-12), the Euro Area third at $19.90T (2026-06), Japan fourth at $10.89T (2026-02). We rank 159 economies by level, in USD, from China down to São Tomé and Príncipe at $202.40M — every row with its own observation date.

161 of the 185 economies we track carry a USD-converted value. We exclude two of those 161 from this level ranking. One is the IMF’s own duplicate euro-area row; the other is Somalia, whose converted figure we don’t trust (both explained below) — leaving 159 ranked rows. The other 24 without a USD figure split into two different groups; we cover both in full below, not in a footnote.

The largest money supplies in the world, ranked in USD

China leads, the United States is second, by $11.96T. The “Latest YoY” column is each economy’s most recent year-over-year change, not the 10-year average. See the growth ranking for that — the two are different metrics and shouldn’t be read as one.

⚠ stale. Switzerland’s 2016 reading is the most recent free figure we can source, and it carries the date to prove it. These same twelve rows open the full table below. It carries all 159 ranked rows — including Russia, Mexico and Türkiye — but drops the Latest YoY column. Each economy’s growth rate lives on its own page and on the growth ranking.

Why China’s $42.64T outranks the US’s $30.68T — and why that’s not a wealth ranking

This is a recurring argument on r/economy. The top-voted reply in that thread (19 upvotes, 2024-12-13) put it plainly: “Chinese households don’t have anywhere else to put their money for growth except savings accounts, while most U.S. money is invested in stocks and other financial instruments that aren’t included in M2” (u/High_Contact_, r/economy).

That’s the whole mechanism. Broad money counts currency, checking and savings accounts, and short-term deposits — the liquid, bank-intermediated slice of an economy. It excludes equities, bonds, real estate and retirement accounts everywhere. The US routes household savings into stocks, bonds and funds sitting outside M2. China’s bank-dominated system and capital controls keep savings inside bank deposits — exactly what M2 measures. A bigger M2 describes how an economy holds its liquid money, not which economy is richer.

Put simply on r/AskEconomics (2024-10-26): “A person can be wealthy without having their wealth in a liquid form. Money supply metrics only show the liquid form” (u/RobThorpe). We rank broad money here — not GDP, not wealth. We say that in the same breath as the China/US comparison because that’s where the confusion starts.

The full ranking: all 159 economies, largest to smallest

The complete money supply by country ranking below covers every economy with a USD-converted value — the latest value for each, sorted largest to smallest. Every row links to that economy’s own page. There you’ll find the figure in its native currency alongside the USD conversion, plus its own YoY and 10-year CAGR growth rates.

What’s excluded from this ranking, and why

24 of 185 economies we track carry no USD value at all, in two unrelated groups. Two more sit inside the 161 that do carry a USD value and are excluded from this specific ranking for separate reasons, covered after them.

Twenty are euro-area members. They are Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain. None issues its own currency since joining. Eleven founders adopted the euro in 1999, the other nine between 2001 and 2023 (Greece first, Croatia last). Germany doesn’t print euros separately from France, so none of these 20 gets a level or growth figure of its own. Every number redirects to the Euro Area row above.

The other four are Anguilla, Montserrat, the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) and the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU). Each carries its own IMF observations and growth rate. What they lack is a USD conversion: the World Bank’s FX table carries no rate for any of the four. That’s a sourcing hole, not a design choice. It’s why all four rank safely on the growth ranking — no FX step needed there — while staying out of every level ranking here.

One more exclusion sits inside the 161 that do carry a USD value: the IMF’s own euro-area row, G163, reports $18.97T (2025-05) — an older pipeline than the Euro Area’s $19.90T above. Showing both would double-count the same currency union, so we keep the fresher ECB-sourced figure and exclude G163. Kosovo, Montenegro and San Marino are the contrast. All three use the euro but sit outside the euro area, so each keeps its own row and USD conversion — currency-union membership, not currency choice, decides the redirect.

A second exclusion sits inside the same 161: Somalia. Its IMF series (MFS_DC/DCORP_L_BM) reports 1.66 billion Somali shillings for 2025-03. Converted to USD at the World Bank’s period-average rate, that’s $71,961. That is about 2,800× smaller than the last row in this table, and roughly 300,000× below the median economy in it. Somalia’s economy runs mostly on the US dollar. The shilling series covers only the residual national currency still in circulation — not the money Somalis actually hold and spend. We don’t believe that figure represents Somalia’s total money supply. So we exclude it from this level ranking rather than publish a number we don’t trust. The series still counts in the growth ranking, where percentage change doesn’t depend on the conversion. Somalia’s own page shows the raw figure with the same caveat.

How every currency becomes a USD figure

Every USD figure here comes from a national currency conversion: we multiply the local-currency observation by the World Bank’s PA.NUS.FCRF period-average annual exchange rate for that observation’s calendar year — an annual average applied to a monthly observation, not a spot rate. That’s a real limitation for a currency moving sharply within a year. It touches level figures only — YoY, 10-year CAGR and doubling time are computed before conversion. Full methodology covers the mechanics.

Broad money isn’t one uniform series either: the US reports M2, the Euro Area M3, the UK M4. How M2, M3 and M4 compare across currencies is what makes ranking 159 different national aggregates on one page legitimate. Read that if “how can you even compare these” is the objection on your mind.

Why our numbers won’t match TradingView’s — or anyone else’s

TradingView’s money-supply hub is the #1 result for this query, and it promises the USD-normalized comparison this page delivers. That normalization evaporates one click deep. The hub shows Russia at “1.74 T USD” (checked 2026-08); Russia’s own symbol page on the same site shows only “134.49 T RUB” — the M2 series itself is published in RUB only. The page does carry one USD figure, 720.35 B USD for Foreign Exchange Reserves, a different indicator entirely, but never converts the money-supply number. On every TradingView page we checked, the comparable money-supply figure for Russia appears only in rubles.

The hub also carries an empty Forecast column on all 137 rows. It has no growth column at all — no YoY, no CAGR — despite ranking for growth queries too. It shows visible data errors, too: Malawi listed at “4.25 T USD,” against our own $4.98B (2025-04) for Malawi — a 1,000× magnitude-prefix slip, billions misread as trillions. Tunisia at “48.07 M USD” and Tajikistan at “6.78 M USD” carry the same ~1,000× slip. Stale rows compound it: New Zealand dated Jan 2017, Mauritius Sep 2018, both checked 2026-08.

theglobaleconomy.com made the opposite trade (checked 2026-08): it adds 3-month and 12-month change columns that TradingView lacks. But it declares its unit only once, in a footnote below the table — “in billion local currency units” — never on a row. Nothing on the page says which currency Albania’s “1271.41” or Argentina’s “158806.65” is denominated in, and the page converts neither to USD.

USD level, growth rate and a legible unit, together, is the combination neither ships. That’s the gap this page fills. It’s also why our own gaps — 24 excluded rows, the Somalia exclusion, 37 stale badges, the annual-average FX limitation — are stated above, not left for you to find.

What a country’s money supply level does — and doesn’t — tell you

A high level mostly reflects two things. One is the size of an economy. The other is how much of its financial activity runs through bank deposits and currency, rather than markets or cash economies. Switzerland and Hong Kong rank far above their population size would suggest because both run outsized banking sectors relative to residents. A low level can mean a small economy, a cash-heavy informal economy, or both.

It is not a proxy for wealth and not GDP. A country can carry a large money supply and a small economy, or the reverse. The level captures the stock of liquid bank money at one point in time — nothing about output, income or assets sitting outside that liquid layer.

Per-capita and money-supply-to-GDP: the honest gap

We don’t publish a per-capita money supply column or a % of GDP column here. Our dataset carries broad-money observations and FX rates. It does not carry population or GDP figures, so we can’t compute either ratio ourselves without importing and vetting a second dataset — which we haven’t done yet. Rather than approximate it, we’re stating the gap plainly: the World Bank publishes broad money as % of GDP directly, series FM.LBL.BMNY.GD.ZS, and it’s the authoritative source for that specific ratio until we build our own.

FAQ