Brand Finance logo

PIF and BlackRock crowned world’s most valuable sovereign wealth fund and asset management brands

29 May 2024
Jump to Media Downloads

Brand Finance launches world’s first global ranking of brand strength and brand value of asset managers and sovereign wealth funds  

  • American asset managers dominate, with BlackRock, JP Morgan Asset Management, and Vanguard among top five strongest and most valuable asset management brands
  • PIF ranked most valuable sovereign wealth fund brand, with trust and stability highlighted
  • Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and PIF emerge as strongest sovereign wealth fund brands

LONDON, 29 May 2024 -- BlackRock is crowned the world’s most valuable asset management (AM) brand, with a brand value of just over $7 billion, and PIF is the most valuable sovereign wealth fund (SWF), according to new data from Brand Finance. Robust revenue growth and innovation have fuelled BlackRock’s brand value, while PIF leads among SWFs driven by its investment strategy, trust in its name, brand awareness, and for being a catalyst for advancement.

BlackRock’s high place in the rankings is underpinned by its forward-thinking approach in technology and sustainability, which attracts clients and drives market evolution. BlackRock’s diverse product offerings have significantly contributed to its market position, securing its status as the leading AM globally.

PIF has the single most valuable brand name among the world’s SWFs; valued at $1.1 billion and among all AM firms, ranked sixth in brand value to assets under management ratio.

JP Morgan Asset Management (JP Morgan AM) claims close second position in the overall ranking, which grades AMs and SWFs together, with a brand value just below $7 billion.  Vanguard followsin third place, with a brand value of $6 billion.

JP Morgan also emerges as the world’s strongest AM & SWF brand, boasting a brand strength index (BSI) score of 87.4 out of 100 and a corresponding AAA rating. JP Morgan noted exceptional scores across several brand strength metrics, including awareness, familiarity, and performance. The only other brand featured in the rankings to achieve a AAA rating is BlackRock, which placed second in terms of brand strength globally.

PIF’s value is largely driven by high scores for the brand’s awareness, purpose and commitment to positive growth. Among the other notable high-ranking SWFs, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority was recognised as the strongest SWF brand, scoring 63.9 out of 100 with an A+ rating. PIF’s own BSI stands at 62.1 out of 100, and also scores A+. Meanwhile Qatar Investment Authority has a BSI of 61.02 and is also graded A+.

David Haigh, Chairman and CEO, Brand Finance, commented:

“With 28 of the 50 brands hailing from the U.S., American firms dominate the asset management ranking, but we must also acknowledge the Gulf for the strength of its sovereign wealth funds. According to Brand Finance research, PIF, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, and Qatar Investment Authority demonstrate impressive brand awareness with A+ brand strength, underscoring the importance of brand perceptions in this sector. With significant AUM and a long investment horizon, PIF and other SWFs are leaning into strategies based on patience and partnership, which we expect to continue to drive the brand perception of SWFs in the coming years.”

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