Top 100 Countries by ICT Goods Exports (% of Total Goods Exports), Latest Year
Countries where ICT goods make the biggest share of merchandise exports
ICT goods exports measure how much of a country’s total goods export basket comes from computers, communications equipment, consumer electronics, electronic components and related technology goods. It is a structure indicator, not a scale indicator. A country can rank high because it has a huge electronics industry, because it is a re-export hub, or because a narrow goods basket makes one category dominate the total.
A high percentage does not always mean the same thing. In Hong Kong SAR, China, the result is shaped heavily by re-export and distribution flows. In the Philippines or Malaysia, it points more directly to semiconductor, electronics assembly, testing and component ecosystems. In a diversified economy such as the United States, Germany or Japan, the ratio is lower partly because the export basket is much broader. Used carefully, the percentage works best as a specialization signal, not as a measure of total technology power.
The embedded ranking below keeps the row year visible because latest available country observations are not uniform. That makes cross-country comparison cleaner and reduces the risk of reading unlike years as if they were fully synchronized.
Top 10 snapshot
The upper end of the distribution is dominated by East and Southeast Asia, with a second smaller cluster in Central Europe and a few special cases such as re-export hubs and microstates. Hong Kong SAR, China; the Philippines; Vietnam; Malaysia; Singapore; South Korea; and China all sit near the core of regional electronics production, component trade, final assembly, testing and packaging, export-processing zones or distribution flows. Small outliers such as St. Kitts and Nevis or Andorra should be read more cautiously because a narrow export base can make the ratio swing sharply.
Hong Kong SAR, China
57.95% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
Re-export and electronics distribution hub where components, finished devices and cross-border logistics inflate the recorded ICT share well beyond what a simple domestic-manufacturing reading would suggest.
Philippines
49.01% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
Semiconductor back-end activity, electronics assembly and related export manufacturing remain a core pillar of merchandise exports.
Vietnam
38.76% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
One of the clearest cases of electronics-led export upgrading in Asia, driven by large-scale final assembly, supplier migration and FDI-backed manufacturing platforms.
Malaysia
34.78% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
Deep electronics ecosystem with strong semiconductor, component, testing and packaging links across the regional supply chain.
Singapore
33.73% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
High-value electronics, precision manufacturing, regional headquarters functions and re-export activity all help keep the share elevated.
South Korea
28.89% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
A mature advanced-manufacturing exporter with strong memory and electronics supply chains.
China
27.09% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
Scale, depth and supplier density keep ICT goods central to the export mix.
St. Kitts and Nevis
26.47% of total goods exports · latest row year 2017
A small-economy outlier where narrow export structure can move the ratio sharply.
Andorra
26.38% of total goods exports · latest row year 2018
Another small-economy outlier where low total goods exports amplify the share result.
Macao SAR, China
19.17% of total goods exports · latest row year 2020
The ratio is lifted by a small export base rather than broad electronics manufacturing.
Chart 1. Top 20 countries by ICT goods exports share
The first chart makes the concentration visible. After the leading Asian electronics and re-export hubs, the distribution falls quickly. By the time the ranking reaches the lower edge of the top 20, values are already close to the global average, which shows how concentrated this specialization still is.
- Hong Kong SAR, China — 57.95%
- Philippines — 49.01%
- Vietnam — 38.76%
- Malaysia — 34.78%
- Singapore — 33.73%
- South Korea — 28.89%
- China — 27.09%
- St. Kitts and Nevis — 26.47%
- Andorra — 26.38%
- Macao SAR, China — 19.17%
- Czech Republic — 17.89%
- Thailand — 16.12%
- Bhutan — 15.87%
- Mexico — 15.39%
- Israel — 14.01%
- Malta — 13.59%
- Hungary — 13.14%
- Slovak Republic — 12.96%
- Netherlands — 11.16%
- Panama — 11.12%
The chart highlights how quickly the distribution falls after the main Asian electronics and re-export hubs, with values near the lower edge of the top 20 already much closer to the broader international range.
Top 100 countries by ICT goods exports (% of total goods exports)
| Rank | Country | ICT goods exports (% of total goods exports) | Latest year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hong Kong SAR, China | 57.95% | 2020 |
| 2 | Philippines | 49.01% | 2020 |
| 3 | Vietnam | 38.76% | 2020 |
| 4 | Malaysia | 34.78% | 2020 |
| 5 | Singapore | 33.73% | 2020 |
| 6 | South Korea | 28.89% | 2020 |
| 7 | China | 27.09% | 2020 |
| 8 | St. Kitts and Nevis | 26.47% | 2017 |
| 9 | Andorra | 26.38% | 2018 |
| 10 | Macao SAR, China | 19.17% | 2020 |
| 11 | Czech Republic | 17.89% | 2020 |
| 12 | Thailand | 16.12% | 2020 |
| 13 | Bhutan | 15.87% | 2011 |
| 14 | Mexico | 15.39% | 2020 |
| 15 | Israel | 14.01% | 2020 |
| 16 | Malta | 13.59% | 2019 |
| 17 | Hungary | 13.14% | 2020 |
| 18 | Slovak Republic | 12.96% | 2020 |
| 19 | Netherlands | 11.16% | 2020 |
| 20 | Panama | 11.12% | 2017 |
| 21 | Latvia | 10.88% | 2020 |
| 22 | United States | 9.67% | 2020 |
| 23 | Estonia | 9.46% | 2020 |
| 24 | Japan | 8.89% | 2020 |
| 25 | Ireland | 8.45% | 2020 |
| 26 | United Arab Emirates | 7.80% | 2019 |
| 27 | Dominica | 7.77% | 2012 |
| 28 | Tuvalu | 7.29% | 2005 |
| 29 | Poland | 7.22% | 2020 |
| 30 | Sweden | 6.64% | 2020 |
| 31 | St. Lucia | 6.56% | 2019 |
| 32 | Lao PDR | 5.95% | 2019 |
| 33 | Fiji | 5.91% | 2019 |
| 34 | Germany | 5.13% | 2020 |
| 35 | Tunisia | 4.24% | 2019 |
| 36 | Tanzania | 4.18% | 2018 |
| 37 | United Kingdom | 4.13% | 2020 |
| 38 | Denmark | 3.96% | 2020 |
| 39 | Lithuania | 3.92% | 2020 |
| 40 | France | 3.77% | 2020 |
| 41 | Portugal | 3.69% | 2020 |
| 42 | Greece | 3.51% | 2020 |
| 43 | Romania | 3.34% | 2020 |
| 44 | Indonesia | 3.33% | 2020 |
| 45 | Bulgaria | 3.21% | 2019 |
| 46 | Austria | 3.09% | 2020 |
| 47 | Egypt | 2.95% | 2020 |
| 48 | Lesotho | 2.80% | 2017 |
| 49 | Finland | 2.50% | 2020 |
| 50 | Belgium | 2.46% | 2020 |
| 51 | Croatia | 2.44% | 2020 |
| 52 | Morocco | 2.43% | 2019 |
| 53 | Ethiopia | 2.42% | 2018 |
| 54 | Italy | 2.16% | 2020 |
| 55 | India | 2.05% | 2020 |
| 56 | Dominican Republic | 1.99% | 2018 |
| 57 | Cyprus | 1.84% | 2020 |
| 58 | Slovenia | 1.81% | 2020 |
| 59 | Spain | 1.72% | 2020 |
| 60 | Luxembourg | 1.71% | 2020 |
| 61 | Canada | 1.71% | 2020 |
| 62 | Serbia | 1.53% | 2020 |
| 63 | Grenada | 1.39% | 2020 |
| 64 | Norway | 1.39% | 2020 |
| 65 | St. Vincent and the Grenadines | 1.31% | 2019 |
| 66 | Mauritius | 1.14% | 2020 |
| 67 | Montenegro | 1.07% | 2020 |
| 68 | Switzerland | 1.05% | 2020 |
| 69 | Australia | 1.04% | 2020 |
| 70 | Belarus | 1.02% | 2020 |
| 71 | Turkey | 1.00% | 2020 |
| 72 | New Zealand | 1.00% | 2020 |
| 73 | Jordan | 1.00% | 2020 |
| 74 | Cambodia | 0.99% | 2019 |
| 75 | South Africa | 0.92% | 2020 |
| 76 | Rwanda | 0.88% | 2019 |
| 77 | Costa Rica | 0.81% | 2019 |
| 78 | Tonga | 0.78% | 2014 |
| 79 | Ukraine | 0.73% | 2020 |
| 80 | North Macedonia | 0.72% | 2020 |
| 81 | Antigua and Barbuda | 0.70% | 2019 |
| 82 | Lebanon | 0.69% | 2020 |
| 83 | Cuba | 0.68% | 2006 |
| 84 | The Bahamas | 0.64% | 2018 |
| 85 | Nepal | 0.63% | 2017 |
| 86 | Myanmar | 0.59% | 2020 |
| 87 | Russia | 0.53% | 2019 |
| 88 | Barbados | 0.52% | 2020 |
| 89 | Comoros | 0.52% | 2019 |
| 90 | New Caledonia | 0.51% | 2015 |
| 91 | Jamaica | 0.48% | 2019 |
| 92 | São Tomé and Principe | 0.44% | 2019 |
| 93 | Colombia | 0.44% | 2020 |
| 94 | Oman | 0.44% | 2018 |
| 95 | Armenia | 0.40% | 2020 |
| 96 | Bahrain | 0.39% | 2018 |
| 97 | Malawi | 0.36% | 2019 |
| 98 | Georgia | 0.36% | 2020 |
| 99 | Chile | 0.32% | 2019 |
| 100 | Brazil | 0.32% | 2020 |
Methodological base: World Bank WDI indicator definition and metadata, with country-level latest available public observations preserved in the year column for transparency. Embedded table updated for publication on April 18, 2026.
Methodology
The indicator is calculated as the value of ICT goods exports divided by total goods exports, multiplied by 100. The official World Bank series code is TX.VAL.ICTG.ZS.UN, and the underlying source is UNCTADstat. ICT goods include computers and peripherals, communication equipment, consumer electronic equipment, electronic components and other related technology goods. Software is generally excluded because, where possible, it is recorded under services rather than goods. For interpretation, that means the page is about tradable hardware and component structure, not about the broader digital economy.
For this page, the analytical reference point is the latest public cross-country observation available for each row, not a forced single-year snapshot. That is why the table keeps a year column. Some economies have observations at 2020, others at 2019, 2018 or earlier. The World Bank indicator page itself shows the series through 2022, and WITS confirms that the dataset is based on reported trade data rather than gap-filled estimates. This matters because electronics trade can move sharply from one year to the next, and using a mixed-latest approach is often more informative for a ranking page than dropping half the world because of uneven reporting lags.
There are also important limitations. First, high ratios do not automatically mean high absolute export value. Second, re-export hubs can score very high because the indicator follows recorded goods trade flows. Third, small economies with narrow export baskets can jump up the table even without a large domestic electronics manufacturing base. Fourth, classification changes in trade statistics and HS revisions can affect comparability over time. The 2022 update to ICT goods trade statistics is one reason the series should be interpreted as a structured trade snapshot, not as a single definitive statement on industrial sophistication.
Practical reading rule: use this ranking together with export values, semiconductor capacity, high-tech manufacturing indicators and services trade data. The ratio shows specialization, not total power.
Insights from the ranking
The top of the ranking is concentrated in East and Southeast Asia because the region combines semiconductor fabrication links, electronic components, final assembly plants, supplier density, export-processing zones and very large ports. Hong Kong SAR, China and Singapore are not the same type of case as Vietnam or Malaysia: the former lean much more heavily on hub, logistics and re-export functions, while the latter are closer to production, assembly, testing and component ecosystems. The ranking becomes much easier to read once those models are separated instead of treated as one single electronics story.
A second pattern is the strength of Central Europe. Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovak Republic all appear high in the ranking because they are embedded in European electronics, automotive-electronics and component supply chains. These are not just low-cost assembly stories. Their positions reflect industrial integration, supplier networks, customs-free access to the EU market and long-run capital investment in manufacturing capacity.
The middle of the table is where interpretation becomes more nuanced. Countries such as the United States, Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom are major technology economies, but ICT goods make up a smaller share of total merchandise exports because their export baskets are broader. They ship aircraft, chemicals, machinery, pharmaceuticals, business equipment and many other categories that dilute the percentage even when electronics exports remain large in absolute terms. In other words, a lower ratio can coexist with much greater technological depth.
The bottom half of the top 100 shows another useful reality: a low ratio does not make a country irrelevant to digitalization. Commodity exporters, service-oriented economies and tourism-led economies can post modest ICT goods shares while still building strong telecom infrastructure, software capacity or digital-service exports. This page is most useful alongside rankings on ICT service exports, high-technology exports and total merchandise export values, rather than as a stand-alone verdict on digital strength.
What this means for the reader
For a reader trying to understand trade resilience, this ranking shows where national export earnings are more tightly linked to electronics demand. Economies with a very high ICT goods share tend to be more exposed to semiconductor cycles, smartphone demand, inventory corrections, shipping bottlenecks and geopolitical restrictions affecting components, chips or advanced equipment.
For investors and business readers, the table helps identify where electronics production ecosystems are already deep enough to support suppliers, logistics firms, testing services, packaging, warehousing and trade finance. A country near the top is often part of a wider regional production web rather than a self-contained national story, which matters far more than the ratio alone.
For policymakers, the ranking is useful as a benchmark for industrial structure. A higher share can reflect genuine export upgrading, but it can also reveal concentration risk. Countries trying to move up the value chain should ask whether they are exporting finished electronics, components, contract manufacturing services, or mostly re-exported goods. Those are very different development stories.
For ordinary readers, the indicator is a quick way to see where electronics are central to how an economy earns foreign exchange. That affects jobs, wages in manufacturing clusters, exposure to global slowdowns and the long-run pressure to keep skills, logistics and energy systems competitive.
FAQ
Why is Hong Kong SAR, China so high in this ranking?
Because the indicator follows recorded goods trade and Hong Kong is a major re-export and distribution hub for electronics and components. A very high share here reflects logistics and trade structure as much as domestic factory output.
Does a higher percentage mean a country exports more electronics in dollar terms?
No. It only means ICT goods account for a larger share of the export basket. A large diversified exporter can have a lower percentage and still export more electronics in absolute value than a smaller, more concentrated economy.
Why do some rich economies rank below Vietnam or the Philippines?
Because the denominator is total goods exports. Rich diversified economies export many categories, so electronics may represent a smaller share even when their technology base is deep and their absolute export value is high.
Can small countries appear unusually high?
Yes. In very small economies, a narrow export basket can make one category dominate the total. That is why the year column and country context matter so much when reading the table.
Is this the same thing as ICT services exports?
No. ICT goods exports cover physical products such as hardware and components. ICT services exports cover items such as telecommunications, computer and information services. A country can rank low on goods and high on services, or the other way around.
Why are row years different across countries?
Because latest available public observations vary by reporting country. Keeping the actual row year visible is more transparent than forcing a fake same-year ranking or dropping countries with slower reporting.
Sources
- World Bank, World Development Indicators. Official indicator page for ICT goods exports (% of total goods exports), series code TX.VAL.ICTG.ZS.UN. Used for definition, official series context and world comparison.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TX.VAL.ICTG.ZS.UN - World Bank DataBank metadata glossary. Used for formula notes, source attribution to UNCTADstat and methodological wording on what counts as ICT goods.
https://databank.worldbank.org/metadataglossary/world-development-indicators/series/TX.VAL.ICTG.ZS.UN - WITS, World Bank. Used to confirm that the dataset is based on reported trade data and to check current public series availability in the by-country interface.
https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/country/by-country/startyear/LTST/endyear/LTST/indicator/TX-VAL-ICTG-ZS-UN - UNCTAD technical note on the 2022 update to ICT goods trade statistics. Useful for classification context and comparability cautions around HS revisions.
https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tn_unctad_ict4d20_en.pdf
Updated for publication: April 18, 2026.
