Top 10 Countries and Territories by Life Expectancy, 2025 Projection
Longevity leaders · UN population estimates
What Separates the Highest-Life-Expectancy Economies in the 2025 Snapshot
Life expectancy at birth summarizes age-specific mortality rates in a single headline measure: the average years a newborn would live if current age-specific mortality rates applied throughout life. This page focuses on the very top of the life expectancy ranking, where small differences in rounding, territory coverage and mortality patterns matter most.
The Top 10 is narrow enough to read at a glance, but the small gaps between leaders need careful interpretation. The key point is not only who ranks first, but why the leading values cluster so tightly in the mid-80s, why territories can appear beside sovereign states, and why final decimals should be read with care.
Compact Top 10 table
The ranking uses rounded 2025 projection values from the UN World Population Prospects 2024 framework. It is territory-inclusive, so places such as Hong Kong, French Polynesia and Réunion appear where comparable demographic estimates are available.
| Rank | Country / territory | Life expectancy | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hong Kong (China) | 85.8 years | Highest rounded life expectancy value in this territory-inclusive leader view. |
| 2 | Japan | 85.0 years | Long-term mortality improvement and strong survival into older ages. |
| 3 | South Korea | 84.5 years | Rapid multi-decade mortality improvement, especially before old age. |
| 4 | French Polynesia | 84.3 years | Shows why territory-inclusive rankings differ from sovereign-only lists. |
| 5 | Switzerland | 84.2 years | Low premature mortality and high survival into older ages. |
| 6 | Australia | 84.2 years | High national survival with important within-country inequality questions. |
| 7 | Italy | 84.0 years | Strong late-life survival and comparatively low premature mortality. |
| 8 | Singapore | 84.0 years | High survival, low preventable mortality and strong health-system performance. |
| 9 | Spain | 84.0 years | High late-life survival and broad access to healthcare. |
| 10 | Réunion (France) | 83.8 years | A territory whose estimate falls inside the leader band. |
Values are rounded to one decimal place. Small differences across public tables can come from rounding, update timing and whether territories are included. This compact table is intended for reading the highest-longevity cluster, where rounding and territory coverage can affect the order.
Overview: what the leader group has in common
The Top 10 sits in a narrow band from 83.8 to 85.8 years. At this level, the ranking is no longer mainly about basic survival. Infant and child mortality are already very low, so the differentiating factors are premature adult mortality, cardiovascular risk, injury and violence mortality, chronic-disease management and survival at very old ages.
Leader
Hong Kong · 85.8
Highest value in this territory-inclusive leader view.
World context
73.3
UN reported global life expectancy at birth at 73.3 years in 2024, after the COVID-era decline.
Top 10 spread
2.0 years
The leader group is tightly clustered, so small revisions can change positions.
Main limitation
Length, not quality
Life expectancy does not measure healthy life years, inequality or quality of care directly.
The leader cluster is shaped by territory coverage, small ranking gaps and mortality patterns at older ages.
Chart: the leader cluster versus the world average
The leaders sit more than ten years above the recent world average. Within the Top 10 itself, the spread is much smaller: the distance from Hong Kong to Réunion is about two years.
Values in years: Hong Kong 85.8; Japan 85.0; South Korea 84.5; French Polynesia 84.3; Switzerland 84.2; Australia 84.2; Italy 84.0; Singapore 84.0; Spain 84.0; Réunion 83.8; world context 73.3.
Methodology
The ranking uses life expectancy at birth, total population, rounded to one decimal place. The source is the UN World Population Prospects 2024 framework, using the 2025 projection view for countries and territories where comparable estimates are available.
Insights: why the Top 10 looks the way it does
In high-longevity settings, deaths are concentrated later in life. The key difference is not only fewer deaths, but fewer premature deaths before old age.
Several leaders sit within a few tenths of a year. A small revision, heatwave or reporting change can reshuffle their order.
Territories can rank highly because international demographic datasets publish separate estimates for them. Sovereign-only lists will look different.
Once life expectancy reaches the mid-80s, dementia care, frailty prevention, diabetes control and late-life quality matter more than headline survival alone.
What this means for readers
Use the Top 10 as a signal of national or territorial mortality conditions, not as a personal forecast. A high value usually reflects low premature mortality, strong prevention, safer environments and effective chronic-disease management. For personal or policy decisions, pair life expectancy with healthy life expectancy, cause-of-death data and inequality measures.
FAQ
Why focus only on the highest-life-expectancy group?
The countries and territories at the top are separated by small decimal differences, so the main value is interpretation: rounding, territory coverage and mortality patterns matter more than a long list of ranks.
Why are territories included?
UN demographic datasets include many countries and areas. A territory-inclusive ranking can include Hong Kong, French Polynesia and Réunion, while a sovereign-only ranking would exclude some of them.
Is life expectancy a prediction for today’s newborns?
Not exactly. It is a period measure based on current age-specific mortality rates. Future medical, social and environmental changes can make real lifespans different.
Why can rankings differ across websites?
Differences usually come from source year, rounding, revision timing and whether territories or microstates are included. The leader group is also tightly clustered.
Does high life expectancy mean better health in every respect?
No. It measures length of life, not healthy years lived. A country can have high life expectancy while still facing major burdens from dementia, disability, inequality or chronic disease.
What should be compared together with life expectancy?
Healthy life expectancy, age-standardized mortality, cause-of-death profiles, infant mortality and within-country survival gaps give a fuller picture.
Sources
These sources provide the demographic framework, indicator definition and health context used to interpret the Top 10 values.
Primary basis for life expectancy estimates and projections for countries and areas.
https://population.un.org/wpp/Direct table for the life expectancy variable used to verify country and territory values.
https://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=PopDiv&f=variableID%3A68Indicator page for life expectancy at birth and international metadata context.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.INContext for mortality, health-system indicators and life-expectancy-related measures.
https://www.who.int/data/ghoComplementary cause-of-death and healthy-life context for interpreting longevity leaders.
https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool
