Brand Finance logo

Hidden gems from US emerge in the real estate battlefront as Chinese brands suffer biggest brand value decline 

15 May 2024
Jump to Media Downloads

New data from Brand Finance reveals shift among global Real Estate brands  

  • Prologis leads US real estate brands with significant rise in brand value, sees largest brand value growth with 75% to USD1.7 billion 
  • Chinese brands witness a downturn amidst market challenges 
  • Vanke defends position as most valuable real estate brand 
  • Emaar remains strongest real estate brand   
  • Vanke has the highest Sustainability Perceptions Value at USD654 million while Country Garden holds the Highest Positive Gap Value at USD18 million 

[LONDON, 15 May 2024] – In a new twist to the global real estate brands arena, hidden gems from the US are emerging as notable champions while Chinese brands grapple with significant declines in brand value, according to a new report by Brand Finance, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy.  

Experiencing a remarkable 53% surge in combined brand value, totalling USD10.3 billion, the total value of US brands which made the top 25 most valuable real estate brands in our rankings are led by Prologis as the standout performer, with its brand value skyrocketing by 75% to USD1.7 billion. US real estate brands now contribute 13% to the total brand value of the top 25 rankings, demonstrating resilience amidst the thriving e-commerce industry, which boosts income for logistics warehouses. 

In contrast, the collective brand value of Chinese real estate brands, representing about 77% of the listed brands, has plummeted by 30.8% to USD60.5 billion. This decline is attributed to various factors, including lingering effects of China's previous real estate debt issues, softened demand in the housing market due to consumer hesitancy towards property purchases, and unfavourable forecasts concerning the economic repercussions of a slowing property market. 

Vanke remains steadfast in its position as the most valuable real estate brand globally, despite experiencing a 21% decrease in brand value, now at USD10.5 billion. Holding onto the top spot, it previously surpassed Country Garden in 2023. Its resilience is evident amid various market challenges, including broader debt issues. 

Richard Haigh, Managing Director of Brand Finance, remarked: 

“Built on a foundation of excellence, supported by awareness activities as simple as its name emblazoned on dozens of its tower blocks, and capped off with fanfare from the burgeoning recognition of the UAE as a centre of trade, it is no surprise that EMAAR has emerged as the strongest real estate brand. It's got the basics sorted, get the brand known, deliver on your promises and the rest will follow.”

Prologis also takes the lead as the fastest-growing real estate brand globally this year, experiencing an impressive 75.1% year-on-year surge in brand value, reaching USD1.7 billion. Following closely behind is Mitsubishi Estate, with a 24% year-on-year growth in its brand value, now standing at USD1.7 billion. 

Emaar, headquartered in the UAE, maintains its position as the strongest real estate brand ranked this year, with a brand value of USD2.6 billion, albeit experiencing a slight 5% decrease. It continues to uphold its AAA- brand strength rating, demonstrating robust performance across various key brand research metrics, including familiarity, reputation, and online presence.  

In terms of brand strength, other real estate brands which also achieved an excellent brand strength rating of AAA- include JLL, CBRE and Vinhomes.  

Brand Finance also utilises its Global Brand Equity Monitor (GBEM) research to compile a Sustainability Perceptions Index, which determines the role of sustainability in driving brand consideration across sectors. In the real estate sector, sustainability drives 6.5% of customer consideration. Brand Finance’s perceptual data also offers insight into which brands global consumers believe to be most committed to sustainability. 

The Index displays the proportion of brand value attributable to sustainability perceptions for individual brands. This Sustainability Perceptions Value is the financial value contingent on a brand’s reputation for acting sustainably. From here, Brand Finance’s perceptual research is analysed alongside CSRHub’s environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance data to determine a brand’s ‘gap value’. This is the value at risk, or value to be gained, arising from the difference between sustainability perceptions and actual performance. The 2024 Sustainability Perceptions Index finds that in the real estate sector, Vanke has the highest Sustainability Perceptions Value of USD654 million

In assessing the gap between sustainability perceptions and performance, Country Garden has the highest positive gap value of USD18 million among real estate brands. A positive gap value means that brand sustainability performance is stronger than perceived: brands can add value through enhanced communication about their sustainability efforts, so that perceptions are raised to fully account for the brand’s actual sustainability performance. Country Garden’s gap value suggests that it could generate an additional USD18 million in potential value for shareholders through enhanced communication of its impact and accomplishments in sustainability. 

Media Downloads

These images may be downloaded and used for publication. Please attribute to Brand Finance.
Copyright © 2024 Brand Finance. All rights reserved.

Media Contacts

Penny Erricker
Communications Executive
Brand Finance

About Brand Finance

Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance for more than 25 years, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organizations of all kinds make strategic decisions.

Headquartered in London, Brand Finance has offices in over 20 countries, offering services on all continents. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 5,000 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 over 5,000 brands, surveying more than 150,000 respondents across 38 countries and 31 industry sectors. Combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database enables Brand Finance to arm brand leaders with the data and analytics they need to enhance brand and business value.

Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardization 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.

Definition of Brand

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

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 Valuation Approach

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.

Get in Touch