Millennials have surpassed older generations in income in 29 of 32 countries: but some areas of life remain problematic

For years, millennials were called a generation unlucky with money, career, and housing. However, an analysis by The Economist showed an unexpected picture: in 29 of the 32 wealthy countries examined, their real incomes are higher than those of previous generations at the same age. The only exceptions were Italy, Greece, and Japan. But why then has buying an apartment become a task for many years for many? It turns out that higher wages and financial well-being are far from the same thing.

Millennials are usually defined as people born from 1981 to 1996. In 2026, the oldest members of the generation turn 45, and the youngest turn 30.

Many have reached the age when earnings typically grow, and management positions, home ownership, and family savings appear. That is why the economic picture today differs markedly from what was observed ten to fifteen years ago.

But the new study also revealed another paradox: even in countries where millennial incomes have risen, they cannot always afford what previous generations acquired much earlier.

In 29 wealthy countries, millennials earn more than their predecessors

The Economist gathered data on the incomes of different generations in 32 wealthy countries. The researchers compared people not by their current age, but at the same stage of life.

For example, the incomes of millennials aged 30 were compared with the incomes of Generation X members when they were also 30.

In addition, amounts were adjusted for inflation. This allows an assessment of changes in real incomes, not just the growth of money sums over the past decades.

The result was unexpected: in 29 of 32 countries, millennials surpassed previous generations in income at a comparable age.

However, the degree of improvement varies considerably.

In Australia, the United Kingdom, and France, progress was comparatively small. While Generation X members noticeably outpaced their predecessors, the advantage of millennials over Generation X is significantly more modest.

In the United States and Poland, by contrast, the intergenerational income growth was more pronounced.

Thus, the widespread notion that millennials everywhere live worse than their parents is not confirmed by data from most of the countries examined.

But that does not mean that every member of the generation has become richer than their parents or that financial difficulties have disappeared.

Italy, Greece, and Japan: three exceptions to the general rule

Especially interesting are the countries in which the new generation has still failed to catch up with the previous one in real incomes.

In Italy, millennials aged 30 earned about 10% less than Generation X members at the same age.

This reflects the long-standing problems of the Italian economy: weak productivity growth, slow wage increases, and difficulties for young professionals in entering stable, well-paid work.

In Greece, the consequences were primarily linked to the severe debt crisis that began in 2009.

During the most difficult period, youth unemployment exceeded 50%. Many people who were beginning their professional lives then faced wage cuts, a lack of vacancies, and the need to seek work abroad.

According to The Economist’s analysis, the real incomes of Greek millennials still lag behind those of young adults in the early 2000s, that is, the period before the economic collapse.

Japan demonstrates a different problem — the consequences of years of stagnation after the financial bubble burst in the early 1990s.

According to the comparison cited by the publication, the income of a 35-year-old Japanese household in 2019 was lower than that of a person of the same age in 1994.

The reasons vary in the three countries, but the result is similar: prolonged economic difficulties disrupted the usual pattern in which each new generation gradually becomes better off than the previous one.

Why millennials began earning more precisely now

The economic youth of this generation fell on an unlucky period.

The global financial crisis of 2007–2009 hit young workers especially hard. It was harder for them to find a first job; many took temporary positions and were the first to be laid off.

In some countries, the effects of the crisis were felt for many years.

But now the situation is changing. One factor was the mass retirement of baby boomers — people born in the post-war decades.

After the financial crisis, many older employees stayed in work longer, seeking to rebuild their retirement savings. This limited advancement opportunities for younger workers.

Later, the situation began to turn in the other direction. The pandemic accelerated some employees' retirement, and a gradually shrinking working-age population intensified employer competition for staff.

By this time, millennials had already accumulated experience and were able to compete for higher-paying positions.

According to The Economist, today an American millennial has roughly the same chances of holding a managerial position as a Generation X member had at a comparable age.

But career advancement does not always mean that a person has come closer to their parents' financial position.

Why higher wages don't guarantee owning a home

The most striking contradiction is found in the real estate market.

A person may earn more than the previous generation at the same age but spend a much larger share of income on rent or saving for a down payment.

The reason is simple: incomes and housing costs do not change at the same pace.

In addition, buying property depends on mortgage conditions, savings, family circumstances, and the availability of financial help from parents.

According to The Economist, in the US, by age 30, about 40% of millennials had acquired their own homes. That was noticeably less than among Generation X members at the same age.

But then an interesting turn occurred.

By age 40, older millennials had almost caught up with Generation X in the share of homeowners.

A similar dynamic is observed in the UK. At age 30, millennials lagged behind previous generations in the share of property owners by about 20 percentage points. By age 40, that gap had narrowed by approximately half.

This means that for part of the generation, buying a home was not impossible, but much later in life.

However, this trend does not eliminate the problem of housing affordability for young people who are just starting their independent lives.

The next generation faces an even more difficult housing market

Data from the UK's Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), published on July 29, 2026, show how much conditions have changed for young buyers.

Among UK residents born in the late 1950s to early 1960s, about 43% owned their own home by age 25.

Among those born in 1997–2001, the corresponding figure is only 15%.

These are predominantly members of Generation Z, not millennials, but this comparison shows precisely that difficulties with acquiring property persist for those who enter the housing market later.

Moreover, at age 25, about 42% of Britons born in 1997–2001 lived with their parents. For generations born from the late 1950s to the mid-1970s, that figure was about a quarter.

The researchers also found that for young people living separately from their parents, housing costs remain a much heavier burden than for generations who began independent life several decades ago.

At the same time, the real incomes of young Britons have hardly grown in recent years compared with those of people of the same age twenty years ago.

So it turns out that part of millennials managed to overcome the initial lag, but the problem of expensive housing itself has not disappeared.

Millennials will receive large inheritances — but there is an unexpected nuance

With age, the generation's financial position may change even more dramatically. And not only thanks to wages and career growth.

In wealthy countries, a massive transfer of wealth from older generations to their children is underway. This includes real estate, savings, and financial assets.

The Economist estimates that the value of assets transferred annually by inheritance in wealthy countries amounts to roughly 10% of their combined GDP.

The UK's Institute for Fiscal Studies already tried in 2020 to estimate what amounts different generations might receive.

According to its projection study, the median inheritance for residents of England born in the 1980s could be about £136,000. For those born in the 1960s, the corresponding estimate was £66,000.

All figures are in 2017–2018 prices. These are calculated estimates, not inheritances already received.

But the most interesting finding emerged from analyzing the age of heirs.

According to IFS forecasts, about a third of people born in the 1980s will not receive an inheritance until at least the age of 70.

The main reason is the increase in parents' life expectancy.

On the one hand, this is a favorable demographic trend. On the other, family assets may pass to children too late to help with buying a first home or the costs of raising children.

Here a new economic paradox arises: a person may in the future become the owner of significant wealth but spend decades of adult life with limited savings.

Why inheritances may further divide a single generation

No less important is the question of the distribution of family wealth.

The IFS projection shows that future inheritances will be highly uneven.

Among residents of England born in the 1980s, about one in five, according to the researchers' calculations, will receive less than £10,000.

At the same time, about a quarter could inherit more than £280,000.

That is a huge difference between people of the same generation.

One person receives real estate from family or a significant sum that can be used to buy housing. Another has to pay rent on their own, save money, and rely solely on their own income.

Moreover, according to IFS, more affluent families are able to pass on significantly more assets to their children than families with modest savings.

Therefore, the growth in average millennial incomes does not mean that financial opportunities within the generation are becoming more equal.

On the contrary, as the role of inheritance grows, differences in family capital may become increasingly important.

Why statistics look better than real feelings

Here it is important to distinguish three indicators: income, accumulated wealth, and the affordability of necessary goods and services.

Income shows how much money a person or household receives over a specific period.

Wealth includes savings, real estate, investments, and other assets minus debts.

And housing affordability depends on the ratio of earnings, property prices, credit costs, and down payment.

Therefore, even a higher wage adjusted for overall inflation does not guarantee that it will be easier for a person to buy an apartment.

Additional confirmation is provided by data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

In its Employment Outlook 2025, the OECD noted that younger generations in most countries do indeed receive higher real incomes than their predecessors at a comparable age.

However, the rate of income growth over the working life for millennials was often weaker than for older generations.

That is, a person may start their career at a relatively high income level but then advance more slowly than their parents.

This is one of the reasons why improvements in statistics do not necessarily mean the disappearance of financial uncertainty.

Why Generation Z may find it harder

While older millennials hold management positions and accumulate assets, the next generation will have to build their careers under conditions of rapid technological change.

The Economist draws attention to the possible impact of artificial intelligence on entry-level jobs.

If companies become more active in automating tasks that were previously assigned to junior employees, young people may find it harder to gain initial professional experience.

Millennials who already have qualifications and management experience are potentially in a more secure position.

However, this is still a possible scenario, not an established result of AI development. New technologies can simultaneously change existing professions and create new employment opportunities.

So has the millennial generation actually become richer?

The new analysis by The Economist refutes the accustomed idea of millennials as a generation doomed everywhere to live worse than the previous one.

In most wealthy countries examined, they really do receive higher real incomes than their predecessors at the same age.

Many have gradually overcome the consequences of the financial crisis, advanced up the career ladder, and managed to purchase their own homes.

But economic well-being cannot be measured by wages alone.

In Italy, Greece, and Japan, the real incomes of millennials remain below those of previous generations. In other countries, buying property often happens much later, and financial capabilities increasingly depend on accumulated family assets.

So a paradox emerges: in many wealthy countries, millennials earn more than their predecessors, but that does not mean they have succeeded in repeating their parents' life path.

Owning a home often comes later, and a large inheritance may come only when the main expenses of starting a family and buying an apartment are already in the past.

Perhaps one of the main economic divides of the coming decades will no longer run so much between generations as between those who receive family capital and those who must create everything on their own.

It is precisely this difference between earnings and real financial well-being that explains why optimistic statistics can coexist with a feeling that the usual life goals have become significantly more expensive.

Based on materials from: The Economist — analysis of millennials' situation, Human Progress, Institute for Fiscal Studies — comparison of living standards across generations, 2026, Institute for Fiscal Studies — inheritance research, 2020, OECD Employment Outlook 2025.