Elon Musk has some new company on the list of the world’s richest people: Taylor Swift, who’s now reached her billionaire “era.”
Buoyed by the rise in Tesla stock and the surge in SpaceX’s valuation, Musk has reclaimed the title of the world’s richest person in an annual ranking of billionaires.
Musk’s US$231 billion fortune catapulted him above Amazon executive chairman Jeff Bezos (US$185 billion) and LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault (US$175 billion), who ranked second and third, respectively, on the 13th Hurun Global Rich Report, an annual survey from China-based media and research firm Hurun. This year marked Musk’s third time in four years at the top of the roster.
Swift made her debut on the list, her wealth, estimated at US$1.2 million, propelled by her Eras Tour and royalties from re-recording her albums.
Mark Zuckerberg (US$158 billion), CEO of Meta Platforms Inc., trailed at No. 4, but added more wealth than anyone on the list, as Meta shares more than doubled, the report said.
Miami-based entrepreneur Ryan Breslow (US$1.3 billion), the 30-year-old chairman of fintech platform Bolt, entered the list this year as its youngest self-made billionaire. While 66 is the average age of billionaires on the list, 93 billionaires ranked are 40 or younger.
The list ranked 3,279 billionaires, up from 3,112 the previous year. The number of billionaires increased by 5% and their total wealth was up 9%, Hurun said in a news release. The wealthiest hail from 2,435 companies and 73 countries.
The wealth calculations are through Jan. 15 of this year.
For the first time, more than half the new wealth on the list was generated by the boom in AI, the report said.
“AI has been the major driver for wealth growth,” Rupert Hoogewerf , Hurun’s chairman and chief researcher, said in a statement. “Whilst [Nvidia president] Jensen Huang has grabbed many of the headlines as Nvidia broke through the US$2 trillion mark and catapulting him into the Hurun Top 30 as a result, the billionaires behind Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Oracle and Meta have seen significant surges in their wealth as investors bet on the value generated by AI.”
Despite losing 155 billionaires, China still claims the most, with 814, the report said. The U.S. added 109 billionaires, for a total of 800. India added 84, and now has almost double the number of billionaires as the U.K., the report said.
If there’s a billionaire capital, it’s New York, where more reside than any other city; London ranked second, and Mumbai third, edging out other locales to become Asia’s hub for billionaires.
Overall, the world’s wealthiest made their money in financial services (10%), followed by consumer goods (8%), and food & beverages (7%) and real estate (7%), Hurun said. By sector, it was a “good year” for media and entertainment, which added US$226 billion, outpacing software and services at US$149 billion, financial services at US$118 billion, and retail, at US$104 billion.
Not everyone was a winner. The report said 1,346 billionaires saw their wealth decrease; 278 of them dropped off the list, with 208 of those hailing from China.
“Wealth creation in China has gone through deep changes these last few years, with the wealth of billionaires from real estate and renewables down,” Hoogewerf said in a statement. “Whilst as many as 40% of the Hurun Global Rich List from the high water mark two years ago have lost their billionaire status, China has added 120 new faces to the list.
The report called the latest rankings a “bad year” for healthcare, where billionaires in the field shed US$75 billion; followed by industrial products, declining US$46 billion; food & beverages, losing US$40 billion; and real estate, dropping by US$32 billion.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
Limited to 630 units, Lamborghini’s latest Urus Capsule pushes personalisation further than ever, blending hybrid performance with over 70 bespoke design combinations.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
For decades, Australia has leaned into its reputation as the lucky country. But luck, as it turns out, is not an economic strategy.
What once looked like resilience now appears increasingly fragile. Beneath the surface of rising property values and steady headline growth, the Australian economy is showing signs of strain that can no longer be ignored.
Recent data paints a sobering picture. Australia has recorded one of the largest declines in real household disposable income per capita among advanced economies.
Wages have failed to keep pace with inflation, meaning many Australians are working harder for less. On a per capita basis, income growth has stalled and, at times, reversed.
And yet, on paper, things still look relatively solid. GDP is growing. Unemployment remains low. But that growth is increasingly being driven by population expansion rather than productivity.
More people are contributing to output, but not necessarily improving living standards.
That distinction matters.
For years, Australia’s economic success rested on a powerful combination: a once-in-a-generation mining boom, a credit-fuelled housing market, strong migration and a property sector that rarely faltered. Between 1991 and 2020, the country avoided recession entirely, building enormous wealth in the process.
But much of that wealth is tied to property. Around two-thirds of household wealth sits in real estate, inflated by leverage and sustained by demand. It has worked, until now.
The problem is the supply side of the economy has not kept up.
Housing supply is falling behind population growth. Rental vacancies are near record lows.
Construction firms are collapsing at an elevated rate. At the same time, massive infrastructure pipelines are competing with residential projects for labour and materials, pushing costs higher and delaying delivery.
The result is a system under pressure from all angles.
Despite near full employment, productivity growth has stagnated for years. In simple terms, Australians are putting in more hours without generating more output per hour. The economy is running faster, butgoing nowhere.
Meanwhile, government spending continues to expand. Public debt is approaching $1 trillion, with spending now accounting for a record share of GDP.
The gap between spending and revenue has been filled by borrowing for decades, adding further pressure to an already stretched system.
This is where the uncomfortable question emerges.
Has Australia become too reliant on a model driven by rising property values, expanding credit and population growth?
As asset prices rise, households feel wealthier and borrow more. Banks lend more. Governments collect more revenue. Migration fuels demand. The cycle reinforces itself.
But when productivity stalls and debt outpaces real income, the system begins to depend on constant expansion just to stay stable.
It is not a collapse scenario. But it is not particularly stable either.
Nowhere is this more evident than in housing.
The National Housing Accord targets 1.2 million new homes over five years, yet current completion rates are well below that pace. With approvals falling and construction costs rising, the gap between supply and demand is widening, not narrowing.
Housing is also one of the largest contributors to inflation, with costs rising sharply across rents, construction and utilities. Yet the private sector, from small investors to major developers, is struggling to make projects stack up in the current environment.
This brings the policy debate into sharper focus.
Tax settings such as negative gearing and capital gains concessions have undoubtedly boosted demand over the past two decades. But they have also supported supply. Removing them may ease prices briefly, but risks deepening the supply shortage over time.
That is the paradox.
Policies designed to make housing more affordable can, in practice, make the shortage worse if they discourage development. The optics may appeal, but the economics are far less forgiving.
It is also worth remembering that most property investors are not institutional players. The majority own just one investment property. They are, in many cases, ordinary Australians using real estate as their primary wealth-building tool.
Undermining that system without replacing it with a viable alternative risks unintended consequences, from reduced supply to higher rents and increased inflation.
So where does that leave Australia?
At a crossroads.
The country can continue to rely on population growth and rising asset prices to drive economic activity. Or it can shift towards a model built on productivity, innovation and sustainable growth.
The latter is harder. It requires structural reform, long-term thinking and political discipline.
But it is also the only path that leads to genuine, lasting prosperity.
The question is no longer whether Australia has been lucky.
It is whether it can evolve before that luck runs out.
Paul Miron is the Co-Founder & Fund Manager of Msquared Capital.
From Italy’s $93,000-a-night villas to a $20,000 Bowral château, a new global ranking showcases the priciest Airbnbs available in 2026.
Barnet, in North London, lays claim to two of the country’s most expensive roads to own a home.










