Country is the 2nd most unequal among nations with Gini data; Guyana, Suriname and Venezuela have no series available
Brazil ranks 5th in GDP per capita adjusted by PPP (purchasing power parity) in South America. Although it is the largest economy in the region in absolute terms, with US$2.28 trillion in GDP in 2025, according to the IMF (International Monetary Fund), the country lags behind smaller neighbors when income is measured per inhabitant and adjusted to the cost of living.
Furthermore, Brazil is the 2nd most unequal country among South American nations with recent data available, according to the Gini index – an indicator used to measure inequality in the distribution of wealth in a country.
Guyana, driven by the strong boom of oil and a small population base, it is not included in the comparison due to the lack of a recent series of inequality. Venezuela, which is facing an economic crisis and distortions associated with Nicolás Maduro’s government, also does not have comparable updated data. Suriname also does not have recent indicators available.
A joint reading of the indicators suggests that the country combines an average average consumption capacity in the region with a strong concentration of income, which helps to explain the gap between the size of the economy and the standard of living perceived by the population.
GDP per capita in PPP adjusts differences in cost of living between countries and allows comparing the average consumption capacity between economies. It is, however, a macroeconomic average, which does not reflect the income actually received by each individual nor its internal distribution.
INEQUALITY
The Gini index, which measures income concentration, indicates that Brazil has one of the most unequal distributions in the region, with a rate of 50.3.
Among the countries with recent data available, only Colombia –54.4– shows greater inequality.
In contrast, countries with greater average purchasing power, such as Uruguay –40–, Argentina –42.4– and Chile –43–, are able to combine higher average income with more balanced distribution than Brazil.
As not all South American countries have recent Gini index data, it is not possible to establish a complete ranking of inequality in the region. In a hypothetical scenario with the inclusion of Guyana, Suriname and Venezuela, the country could occupy a lower position in the ranking, such as 5th place, but there is not enough data to confirm this comparison.
POVERTY
Poverty indicators reinforce Brazil’s intermediate position in the regional scenario. According to the World Bank, in 2024, 3.01% of the Brazilian population lived on less than US$3.00 per day.
The percentage is significantly higher than that observed in the Southern Cone, where Uruguay –0.17%–, Chile –0.40%– and Argentina –0.96%– have lower levels of extreme poverty.
On the other hand, Brazil performs better than countries such as Colombia –8.50%–, as well as Ecuador –7.31%– and Peru –5.14%.
According to the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics), in 2025, the average per capita household income of Brazilians was R$2,316. The Federal District appears in 1st place, with R$4,538, followed by São Paulo, with R$2,956, and Rio Grande do Sul, with R$2,839.
This indicates that the country lives with strong regional inequalities, since the income in the richest federation unit is almost 4 times higher than that recorded in Maranhão (R$ 1,219), the state with the lowest value. Here is it (PDF – 194 kB).
READING TOGETHER
The combination of the 3 indicators suggests that Brazil occupies an intermediate position in South America in terms of average income, but with a strong concentration of income and heterogeneous social results.
Despite being the largest economy in the region, the country does not lead in purchasing power per inhabitant and has high levels of inequality, which limits the spread of economic gains among the population.
The regional comparison also indicates that smaller countries are able, in some cases, to combine higher average income with lower inequality, suggesting that economic growth and income distribution do not necessarily go together.
