U.S. States Ranked by GDP
Which states produce the most economic output? This table orders all 50 states by millions of current dollars, using 2025 observations.
Largest state economies in 2025
California ranks first at 4,297,449.8. The last-ranked state is Vermont, at 49,657.5. Equal displayed values share competition rank; alphabetical order within a tie does not establish a lead. These figures use the same period and definition.
This is a ranking of economic size. A large population and a large business base can increase total output even when output per resident is modest. The median of the 50 state observations is 342,780.7; this unweighted state median is not the national rate or total. Annual estimates remain revisable; source publication dates appear in the methodology below.
Complete ranking and historical periods
50 states · 2025 · Millions of current dollars. Highest values first; ties share a rank.
On narrow screens, scroll the table sideways to read every column.
| Rank | State | Value | Rank one year earlier | Share of U.S. GDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | California | 4,297,449.8 | 1 | 13.93% |
| 2 | Texas | 2,932,343.6 | 2 | 9.50% |
| 3 | New York | 2,465,749.3 | 3 | 7.99% |
| 4 | Florida | 1,805,620.2 | 4 | 5.85% |
| 5 | Illinois | 1,240,982.7 | 5 | 4.02% |
| 6 | Pennsylvania | 1,056,488.2 | 6 | 3.42% |
| 7 | Ohio | 976,871.7 | 7 | 3.17% |
| 8 | Georgia | 936,086.7 | 8 | 3.03% |
| 9 | North Carolina | 895,919.2 | 9 | 2.90% |
| 10 | Washington | 892,254.8 | 11 | 2.89% |
| 11 | New Jersey | 887,793.1 | 10 | 2.88% |
| 12 | Massachusetts | 813,590.5 | 12 | 2.64% |
| 13 | Virginia | 807,925.0 | 13 | 2.62% |
| 14 | Michigan | 733,887.1 | 14 | 2.38% |
| 15 | Arizona | 592,103.0 | 15 | 1.92% |
| 16 | Tennessee | 586,210.1 | 16 | 1.90% |
| 17 | Colorado | 574,863.9 | 17 | 1.86% |
| 18 | Maryland | 567,018.5 | 18 | 1.84% |
| 19 | Indiana | 542,457.6 | 19 | 1.76% |
| 20 | Minnesota | 515,116.4 | 20 | 1.67% |
| 21 | Wisconsin | 478,781.2 | 21 | 1.55% |
| 22 | Missouri | 475,377.3 | 22 | 1.54% |
| 23 | Connecticut | 382,595.5 | 23 | 1.24% |
| 24 | South Carolina | 378,383.0 | 24 | 1.23% |
| 25 | Oregon | 343,240.2 | 26 | 1.11% |
| 26 | Louisiana | 342,321.2 | 25 | 1.11% |
| 27 | Alabama | 339,035.1 | 27 | 1.10% |
| 28 | Utah | 319,178.6 | 28 | 1.03% |
| 29 | Kentucky | 313,566.3 | 29 | 1.02% |
| 30 | Nevada | 281,376.7 | 30 | 0.91% |
| 31 | Oklahoma | 274,292.2 | 32 | 0.89% |
| 32 | Iowa | 271,937.2 | 31 | 0.88% |
| 33 | Kansas | 232,106.7 | 33 | 0.75% |
| 34 | Nebraska | 206,616.2 | 34 | 0.67% |
| 35 | Arkansas | 195,988.2 | 35 | 0.64% |
| 36 | Mississippi | 162,824.8 | 36 | 0.53% |
| 37 | New Mexico | 152,120.0 | 37 | 0.49% |
| 38 | Idaho | 137,401.9 | 38 | 0.45% |
| 39 | New Hampshire | 128,278.6 | 39 | 0.42% |
| 40 | Hawaii | 123,163.8 | 40 | 0.40% |
| 41 | Delaware | 121,940.0 | 41 | 0.40% |
| 42 | West Virginia | 111,302.3 | 42 | 0.36% |
| 43 | Maine | 101,726.2 | 43 | 0.33% |
| 44 | Rhode Island | 88,240.6 | 44 | 0.29% |
| 45 | North Dakota | 82,349.8 | 45 | 0.27% |
| 46 | South Dakota | 82,001.9 | 46 | 0.27% |
| 47 | Montana | 80,945.2 | 47 | 0.26% |
| 48 | Alaska | 73,634.8 | 48 | 0.24% |
| 49 | Wyoming | 52,491.2 | 49 | 0.17% |
| 50 | Vermont | 49,657.5 | 50 | 0.16% |
Change period · Download displayed data
District of Columbia: 192,975.4 millions of current dollars, shown separately and excluded from ranks.
Changing the period updates the table and export. The introductory analysis above concerns 2025. All historical choices use the same acquired revised history.
What changed in the ranking?
California occupies position 1 in 2025 and occupied position 1 in 2024 within this acquired history. Compare the underlying levels before interpreting movement: other states’ changes can alter a rank even when a state’s own value barely changes. A change in rank is not itself a growth rate, and it cannot establish a policy cause.
Why total GDP and growth rankings differ
Annual gross domestic product records the value added by production located in a state. A large economy can grow slowly and remain near the top of a size ranking; a small economy can grow quickly while contributing relatively little to the national dollar total. The size and growth tables answer different research questions, so use both when evaluating a regional market.
Current-dollar output incorporates the prices of the year being measured. This makes it appropriate for comparing the scale of nominal economic activity in the same year. It does not isolate changes in production volumes over time. For that question, follow real GDP growth, which uses the price-adjusted series from the same producer package.
Interpreting a state’s share of U.S. output
The national share is state current-dollar GDP divided by the published U.S. current-dollar total, multiplied by 100. The denominator is the producer’s national observation for the same year, rather than a total assembled by adding selected states. District of Columbia is displayed separately because it is not one of the 50 states.
A state’s output includes production by establishments operating there. It is not the income received by its residents, the revenue of companies headquartered there, or the market value of listed companies. A firm can have its headquarters in one state and produce in several others. Payroll jobs and industry detail help explain that distinction on each state profile.
Choosing a useful benchmark
For a business evaluating the size of a potential market, GDP provides broad context rather than a customer count. Pair the total with a relevant industry, resident income and the observation year. Sector output is value added; it should not be substituted for retail sales or a company’s sales opportunities.
For a journalist comparing states of very different size, GDP per capita can be a better companion measure. It removes population scale but retains workplace-based production and other definitional limitations. Neither total nor per-capita GDP is a complete quality-of-life measure.
Sources, formula and ranking methodology
Measure: BEA SAGDP1, line 3. Method: Published annual current-dollar GDP; no price adjustment or annualization. The display and rank use 1 decimal place. Equal values receive competition rank; missing values are omitted from the ranked universe and reported in the table status. Filtering preserves national ranks.
Source file publication: September 30, 2026. Site acquisition: September 30, 2026. The annual GDP/income files contain 2025 observations; the price-parity file contains 2024 observations; labor series contain August 2026. These dates must not be relabeled as one current-month dashboard. Revised estimates in this acquisition are distinct from a historical release-vintage archive.
BEA state GDP methods · BEA state personal income · BEA regional price-parity methods · BLS state employment release and statistical notes · Files, dictionary and source checksums.