Singapore remains most expensive city for the rich in 2025

In the global luxury economy, price signals often double as strategic ones. So when Julius Baer’s 2025 Global Wealth and Lifestyle Report shows Hong Kong dropping behind London, while Singapore maintains its top spot as the world’s most expensive city for the rich, the implications extend far beyond boutique handbags and school fees. The shift reflects how high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) are recalibrating cost, access, and confidence across global wealth hubs.

This isn’t merely a headline about affluence. It’s a window into which cities the global elite believe will protect their mobility, legacy, and leverage in a shifting geopolitical landscape.

The Julius Baer index, based on prices from December to April across 25 cities, measures the “cost of living well.” That means more than Michelin-star meals or luxury watches. The basket includes real estate, medical care, school fees, and discretionary spending patterns unique to HNWIs—essentials in the architecture of elite life. And it reveals an instructive divergence.

Singapore remains number one not because it got more expensive, but because others became more exposed. Hong Kong’s slip to third is emblematic: it’s still costly, but less confidently so. London’s return to second suggests a recalibrated appetite for stable governance and global connectivity, even amid post-Brexit drag.

Just a few years ago, Hong Kong epitomized the convergence of East-West financial fluidity. But the last 24 months have delivered a recalibration. Regulatory tightening, geopolitical ambiguity, and soft capital flight from the mainland have diluted its premium. At the same time, Singapore hasn’t just maintained its sheen—it has reinforced it. Stable tax policy, sound governance, and institutional neutrality have allowed it to function as both an operations base and a personal safe harbor for Asia’s mobile wealth.

London’s return to second place is notable. Despite inflationary challenges and tax reshuffles, it retains legacy appeal: legal certainty, cultural capital, and elite schooling. But this strength may also be temporary. Its rise in rank owes as much to relative stagnation elsewhere as to renewed structural competitiveness.

The Julius Baer basket isn’t just about consumption. It’s a proxy for elite access and risk hedging. Medical expenses, school fees, and property prices aren’t luxuries—they’re strategic investments in continuity and control.

That’s why Singapore’s top rank deserves more scrutiny. Its healthcare system, urban order, and tax transparency make it a frictionless zone for wealth defense. It isn’t just expensive—it’s efficient. Hong Kong’s decline, by contrast, speaks to growing friction: in legal confidence, cross-border capital flows, and even public perception.

Dubai, notably absent from the top three, continues to rise in lifestyle appeal and policy innovation—but hasn’t yet priced itself into the top tier for sustained cost-of-living metrics. That may be strategic. The UAE has pursued volume over margin—capturing global talent and capital inflows through zero-tax residency, but avoiding saturation pricing in areas like education and property. The result is a high-growth elite economy without the optics of cost inflation—yet.

Similarly, European hubs like Paris or Milan maintain luxury infrastructure without over-indexing on elite friction points like property taxes or immigration bottlenecks. Their omission from the top three reflects not decline, but a more managed posture toward wealthy residents.

This isn’t a story about rich people spending more. It’s about which cities command the confidence of long-term planners and capital stewards. Singapore’s top rank suggests it remains the default institutional base for Asian wealth, blending East-West neutrality with legal and infrastructure coherence. Hong Kong’s decline signals discomfort with its political alignment and capital predictability. London’s ascent hints at renewed trust in Western legal regimes, even amid fiscal complexity.

For private banks, relocation strategists, and international schools, these rankings aren’t cosmetic. They inform pricing power, growth forecasts, and regional hiring decisions. For governments, the lesson is clear: frictionless elite ecosystems are less about tax breaks and more about institutional trust.

As cross-border wealth re-anchors itself in post-COVID, post-globalization logic, we’re no longer watching cities compete on glamour. We’re watching them compete on credibility. Singapore may be costly—but for many HNWIs, it’s the cost of certainty. London’s resurgence reflects the residual strength of cultural institutions and global networks. Hong Kong’s slip, however slight, signals something harder to price: fading conviction.

And the next inflection point won’t be driven by interest rates or consumer demand. It will be shaped by jurisdictional resilience—how cities absorb regulatory shocks, manage immigration flows, and scale digital governance. In that calculus, transparency and talent mobility will matter more than boutiques or beach clubs.

The winners won’t just attract money. They’ll retain conviction.