Brand Finance’s Technology 100 2026 journal reveals South Korea’s leading tech brands are worth $135.3 billion
SEOUL, 3 March 2026 – South Korea’s five leading tech brands posted an 8% rise in collective brand value to USD135.3 billion this year, according to Brand Finance’s Technology 100 2026 journal, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. The performance places South Korea third in the global technology sector, behind US and China, strengthening its competitive standing in the industry.
Samsung (brand value up 9% to USD97.4 billion) continues to be the only South Korean tech brand within the sector’s top 10 most valuable. The growth is spurred by the company’s leadership in memory chips and semiconductors, as strong demand for advanced memory chips has improved earnings expectations and reinforced its long-term outlook.
Moving up a rank to place 28th globally this year, SK hynix’s (brand value up 15% to USD15.8 billion) double digit growth is supported by a strong revenue performance, robust demand for AI memory solutions, and the production of AI-focused GPU servers.
Meanwhile, Coupang (brand value up 10% to USD8.8 billion) stands out as the only technology brand from the country to record an improvement in its Brand Strength Index (BSI) score rising from 72/100 (2025) to 75.8/100 this year. The gain reflects continued investments in logistics infrastructure, enhancing delivery reliability and customer experience, and strengthening competitive positioning in South Korea’s e-commerce market.
Alex Haigh, Managing Director, Brand Finance Asia Pacific, commented:
“South Korea’s technology brands are shaping a stronger global presence, with operational excellence, technological innovation, and customer-focused strategies fuelling brand value growth. Coupang’s Brand Strength Index score performance stems mainly from the expansion of its already comprehensive delivery service to the online grocery market, attracting users due to the variety of service that they now provide while Samsung and SK hynix remain as an example of South Korean ingenuity and technological prowess.”
Other notable South Korean tech brands in the Technology 100 2026 journal include:
The Technology 100 2026 journal offers an overview of the world’s most valuable and strongest technology-driven brands by bringing together insights from multiple rankings such as the Semiconductors 30 and the Electronics and Appliances 50, which provides brand valuation of the top brands from their respective sectors.
South Korea places third in the global semiconductors sector according to Brand Finance’s Semiconductors 30 2026 ranking. Samsung Sdi (brand value down 29% to USD977 million) is 26th among the world’s 30 most valuable semiconductor brands. This year, Samsung Sdi’s Brand Strength Index (BSI) score improved from 61.9/100 (2025) to 71/100 with a brand strength rating of AA.
Coway (brand value up 30% to USD1.4 billion) moves up three spots to rank 44th this year among the world’s 50 most valuable Electronics and Appliances brands. Its double-digit brand value growth is aided by increased revenue forecast and business performance in various Southeast Asian markets.
Global Insights
The total brand value of the world’s top 100 technology brands climbed to USD3.7 trillion in 2026. Apple, Microsoft, and Google retained their positions as the three most valuable global technology brands, while NVIDIA emerged as the world’s fastest-growing tech brand, followed by Broadcom and AMD.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance operates in over 25 countries. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 6,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on 6,000 brands, surveying more than 175,000 respondents across 41 countries and 31 industry sectors. By combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database — the largest brand value database in the world — Brand Finance equips ambitious brand leaders with the data, analytics, and the strategic guidance they need to enhance brand and business value.
In addition to calculating brand value, Brand Finance also determines the relative strength of brands through a balanced scorecard of metrics, compliant with ISO 20671.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm and a committed leader in the standardisation of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
