The Global Financial Inclusion Index Key themes Populations’ perceptions of financial inclusion

Populations’ perceptions of financial inclusion

How do people rate the access they have to financial support, products, tools, and services?

Mother and toddler son in a bus
4 min read |

Note: Below is a featured key finding from the 2022 Global Financial Inclusion Index.

The Global Financial Inclusion Index models financial inclusion based, predominantly, on quantitative secondary data sources. However, to provide a complete and holistic picture of global financial inclusion, it’s important to also consider the view of individuals across the 42 markets and analyze the extent to which these populations recognize and understand how governments, financial systems, and their employers support their financial well-being. The Index has therefore been supplemented with a comprehensive consumer survey of 500 people from each of the 42 markets to determine how people rate the access they have to financial support, products, tools, and services, and how this stacks up to programs, provisions, and performance of these institutions as measured by the Index.

The table provides a ranking of financial inclusion by market according to the results of this survey.

  • The overall rank is based on individuals’ responses to the question: To what extent do you feel financially included in your market?
  • The government, financial system, and employer support columns are based on individuals’ responses to the question: To what extent do you feel the following groups act in a way which is helpful for you to feel financially included?

Across all columns, the table shows the percentage of those who feel financially included.

The following table provides Population survey rankings of financial inclusion by market.1

Population survey rankings

Rank Country Score Government % Financial system % Employer % Overall %
1 China 97.24% 96.65% 95.46% 92.49% 97.24%
2 Vietnam 95.12% 89.06% 91.41% 87.77% 95.12%
3 India 92.20% 88.40% 88.00% 90.59% 92.20%
4 Saudi Arabia 91.63% 90.44% 87.65% 89.83% 91.63%
5 Hong Kong 88.42% 74.45% 81.64% 66.12% 88.42%
6 Singapore 87.35% 80.83% 81.42% 78.75% 87.35%
7 Switzerland 85.63% 69.06% 65.07% 78.33% 85.63%
8 United Arab Emirates 85.46% 84.66% 83.07% 83.09% 85.46%
9 Finland 85.12% 66.67% 67.66% 80.87% 85.12%
10 United States 84.75% 71.68% 77.03% 84.05% 84.75%
11 Denmark 83.07% 74.70% 62.15% 79.65% 83.07%
12 Taiwan 82.14% 73.02% 84.13% 63.54% 82.14%
13 Thailand 81.36% 58.64% 77.67% 78.07% 81.36%
14 France 80.40% 60.20% 62.60% 75.26% 80.40%
15 Poland 79.80% 50.20% 73.40% 79.87% 79.80%
16 Canada 79.20% 60.80% 72.40% 76.35% 79.20%
17 Indonesia 78.10% 72.29% 77.13% 83.69% 78.10%
18 The Netherlands 77.51% 62.45% 65.24% 79.51% 77.51%
19 Israel 76.60% 54.00% 62.00% 73.37% 76.60%
20 Malaysia 76.25% 78.04% 76.05% 78.51% 76.25%
21 Germany 76.20% 54.80% 53.80% 75.53% 76.20%
22 South Korea 75.54% 69.23% 74.95% 69.77% 75.54%
23 Nigeria 75.00% 58.20% 79.88% 88.33% 75.00%
24 Norway 73.85% 62.48% 59.08% 73.22% 73.85%
24 United Kingdom 73.85% 46.91% 62.08% 79.55% 73.85%
26 Ghana 72.65% 56.69% 72.85% 81.65% 72.65%
27 New Zealand 71.73% 59.26% 61.01% 72.82% 71.73%
28 Turkey 69.80% 48.80% 60.80% 62.34% 69.80%
29 Sweden 69.40% 50.40% 52.20% 71.55% 69.40%
30 Kenya 68.73% 57.37% 84.66% 87.93% 68.73%
31 Italy 68.00% 48.40% 58.40% 70.47% 68.00%
32 Australia 67.64% 49.22% 54.84% 77.61% 67.64%
33 Spain 67.20% 43.20% 54.80% 69.34% 67.20%
34 South Africa 65.94% 49.60% 73.31% 82.02% 65.94%
35 Brazil 64.60% 48.20% 73.80% 88.59% 64.60%
36 Ireland 62.25% 41.50% 54.35% 70.08% 62.25%
37 Peru 61.09% 41.44% 72.18% 67.13% 61.09%
38 Mexico 60.80% 49.40% 69.00% 75.68% 60.80%
39 Argentina  56.19% 31.83% 60.12% 71.54% 56.19%
40 Chile 54.80% 36.80% 54.80% 70.30% 54.80%
41 Japan 51.15% 64.23% 68.85% 68.75% 51.15%
42 Colombia 48.35% 41.75% 64.85% 77.11% 48.35%

Key trends in the relationship between the Global Financial Inclusion Index and populations’ perceptions of financial inclusion in their market

Five markets rank in both the top 10 overall for the Global Financial Inclusion Index analysis and also by consumer sentiment: Singapore, the U.S., Hong Kong, Finland, and Switzerland.

Similarly, five markets rank in both the bottom 10 for the Index analysis and consumer sentiment: South Africa, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Colombia.

The overall correlation coefficient between the Index rankings and consumer sentiment rankings is 0.48. This implies a positive relationship between both data sets.

However, it’s not very strong and there are some notable trends and outliers.

Population sentiment rankings are higher than the Index rankings in 19 markets. The opposite is true in 20 other markets, where individuals reported feeling less positive about financial inclusion than their market's rankings in the Index. In three markets, consumers' perceptions of financial inclusion matched their Index rankings.

In most cases (64%), the difference in the rankings of a given market between the two data sets falls within a 10-point margin, yet some markets show significant discrepancies between the financial inclusion support which governments, financial services companies, and employers provide, versus how their populations perceive financial inclusion.

  • Of the 19 markets in which population sentiment rankings are higher than the Index, 14 are in Asia, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.
  • For nine out of 14 European markets tracked, the Index ranking is higher than the ranking given by the population survey.
  • The largest gaps where the population survey ranks financial inclusion higher than the Index can be seen in developing and emerging markets: Saudi Arabia (28 points), Vietnam (28 points), India (23 points), Nigeria (17 points), and China (16 points).
  • The largest gaps where the Index ranks markets higher than the population survey can be seen in developed economies: Sweden (26 points), Australia (25 points), Japan (19 points), Ireland (15 points), and New Zealand (15 points).

In general, the survey suggests that emerging market populations appear more satisfied with the extent to which their local institutions provide for their financial inclusion than the underlying data analyzed in the Index suggest they do.

One interpretation of this might be that in lower income economies with higher poverty levels and large wealth divides, the expectation people have for their own financial well-being is lower. By contrast, the populations of larger, wealthier, developed economies have greater expectations and hold their institutions to a higher standard. In these markets, there are government and regulatory financial safety nets in place and access to credit is easier, which in turn creates a higher bar for what an individual believes their financial circumstances ought to be.

Connect with us

Want to stay up to date on our research insights? Follow us on LinkedIn. Have a question for our media team? Contact media relations.