Healthcare Spending as % of GDP: Country Comparison

2023 figures for 25 countries, from the US outlier to Latin America’s wide range, and why a bigger share of the economy isn’t a better score.

Bottom line up front: In 2023 the United States spent about 16.7% of its GDP on healthcare, according to World Health Organization expenditure data published by Our World in Data (accessed October 2026). Most large European economies and Canada spent 11–12%, the UK about 11.0% and Colombia about 8.2%. Share of GDP measures how much of a country's economy goes into health. It doesn't tell you how good the care is or what you'll be charged.

What "share of GDP" measures, and what it doesn't

The figure divides a country's current health expenditure (everything spent on health goods and services in a year, by government, insurers, employers and households) by its gross domestic product. Spending on new buildings and equipment is usually counted separately, so the ratio describes running costs.

Because it's a ratio, it moves when either side moves:

That's why this metric works best alongside per-person spending. Our article on spending per capita covers the dollar side. This one focuses on the share of the economy.

Health spending as a share of GDP, 2023

Current Health Expenditure as % of GDP, 2023

Source: WHO Global Health Expenditure Database as published by Our World in Data (2023 values, accessed October 2026).
GroupCountry% of GDP (2023)
OutlierUnited States16.7%
High-spending Europe & CanadaGermany11.7%
Switzerland11.7%
France11.5%
Canada11.2%
Sweden / Austria11.2%
United Kingdom11.0%
Other high-incomeJapan10.7%
Australia10.4%
Netherlands9.8%
Spain9.2%
South Korea8.6%
Italy8.4%
Singapore4.5%
Latin AmericaArgentina10.3%
Chile10.2%
Brazil9.7%
Uruguay9.0%
Panama8.3%
Colombia8.2%
Ecuador7.6%
Costa Rica6.9%
Peru5.6%
Mexico5.5%
Other medical-travel destinationsTurkey4.3%
India3.3%

Four things the 2023 numbers show

The US is in a category of its own

At 16.7%, the US spends about five percentage points more of its economy on health than Germany or Switzerland, the next-highest large economies in the table. Because the ratio already scales spending to the size of each economy, the gap can't be explained by the US simply being bigger.

Wealthy countries cluster tightly, with exceptions

Most of Western Europe, Canada and Japan sit between about 10% and 12%. Singapore is the clear exception among high-income economies at 4.5%. Ireland (6.6%) and Luxembourg (5.8%) are also low, a reminder that in a GDP ratio the denominator matters as much as the numerator.

Latin America spans a wide range

Argentina (10.3%) and Chile (10.2%) spend shares close to Western Europe's. Mexico (5.5%) and Peru (5.6%) spend about half as much of their economies. Colombia, at 8.2%, is in the middle with Panama (8.3%), not far below Uruguay (9.0%).

Popular destinations aren't high spenders

Several countries known for medical travel, including Turkey (4.3%), Mexico (5.5%) and India (3.3%), spend a small share of GDP on health. That reflects the national system as a whole. It doesn't describe the private hospitals that treat international patients, which can be well funded even where national spending is low.

Same share, different payers

Two countries can spend similar shares of GDP and still split the bill very differently between public budgets, insurers and households. Combining the GDP share with the out-of-pocket share from the same World Bank and WHO data family (latest years 2023–2024, via Our World in Data) shows this clearly:

CountryHealth spending, % of GDP (2023)Paid out of pocket, % of health spending
United States16.7%10.9%
United Kingdom11.0%14.6%
Chile10.2%39.1%
Brazil9.7%26.2%
Colombia8.2%14.7%
Costa Rica6.9%24.1%
Mexico5.5%41.2%

Chile and the UK spend similar shares of GDP, but Chilean households pay a far larger part directly. Colombia spends a smaller share than Chile or Brazil, yet its households pay a smaller part directly than either. Mexico spends the least of the group and households carry the most. For a patient, the out-of-pocket column says more about how exposed people are to bills. The GDP column says more about the size of the system.

Why a bigger share isn't a better score

A larger share of GDP buys more health services, more staff, more equipment and, in some systems, higher prices for the same services. The ratio can't separate those. A country could raise its share by paying more for identical care, and its patients would be no better off.

The share also says nothing about how evenly the spending reaches people. Two countries with the same share can differ greatly in how many residents have coverage, how long they wait and how much they pay at the point of care. Those are separate measures, and they matter more to an individual patient than the national total.

To judge value you need to put spending next to outcomes and access, and be careful about how the comparison is built. Our methodology primer explains how to combine indicators without fooling yourself. Before quoting a figure, check that it's 2023 data rather than an older value presented as current.

What this means if you're pricing care abroad

The GDP share is a statement about a country's economy, not about the quote you'll receive. A procedure price depends on the hospital, the surgeon, the implant, the length of stay and what's bundled in. Countries that spend less of their GDP on health can still have expensive private hospitals, and high-spending countries can have reasonably priced outpatient centres.

Use national spending to understand context: how stretched the public system might be, how much patients there typically pay themselves, and why demand for private care exists. Then compare actual, itemised prices for your procedure. Our hip replacement cost comparison shows what a procedure-level comparison looks like.

Why two sources can give slightly different figures

If you've seen a different number for the same country, it isn't necessarily an error. International health spending figures are revised as countries update their national accounts, and organisations publishing them may use different editions of the data or slightly different definitions. The most common differences are:

A quick checklist for any share-of-GDP claim

  1. Which year does the figure describe?
  2. Is it current health expenditure or total, including capital?
  3. Who published it, and does the comparison use the same source for every country?
  4. Did the economy grow or shrink sharply that year?
  5. Is the claim using the share to say something about quality? If so, look for outcome data as well.

A comparison that passes these checks is a reasonable guide to the relative size of health systems. One that doesn't may simply be comparing different things.

The Takeaway

In 2023 the US devoted about 16.7% of its economy to health, against roughly 11–12% in most large European economies and Canada, and about 8.2% in Colombia. The ratio is a good measure of the scale of a system and a poor measure of quality or price. Pair it with out-of-pocket data and outcomes, and use itemised quotes to make decisions.

Frequently asked questions

What percentage of GDP does the US spend on healthcare?

About 16.7% in 2023, according to WHO expenditure data published by Our World in Data. That's the highest among the large economies in our table.

How much of its GDP does Colombia spend on health?

About 8.2% in 2023. That's close to Panama (8.3%), below Chile (10.2%) and Brazil (9.7%), and above Mexico (5.5%) and Peru (5.6%).

Which wealthy country spends the smallest share of GDP on health?

Of the high-income countries in our table, Singapore is the lowest at about 4.5% in 2023. Ireland (6.6%) and Luxembourg (5.8%) are also well below the European cluster.

Is percent of GDP better than spending per person?

Neither is better. They answer different questions. Share of GDP shows how much of the economy goes into health. Spending per person shows the money behind each resident. Read them together.

Why do some poor countries show high health spending shares?

Because the ratio depends on GDP as well as spending. Where the economy is small, even a modest health budget can be a large share of it. A high share in that case doesn't mean care is abundant.