Guides › Modern wealth
The State of Modern Wealth: A Benchmark Report Methodology
The State of Modern Wealth is a proposed annual report on the eight wealth dimensions among assessment participants. This page is a methodology and reporting template, not a released benchmark study. No 2026 participant statistics or high-earner findings are reported here, and no claim is made that site visitors represent the wider population.
What would the Wealth Dimensions Index measure?
The proposed report would describe the distribution of each dimension’s assessment results within a defined participant sample. It would publish counts, score definitions and limitations alongside any summary. Scores from different dimensions measure different things, so an equal numeric value would not establish equal resources or equal need.
See the published scoring method before interpreting a future table. The CFPB’s financial well-being research and BLS time-use program are examples of documented measurement approaches, not sources of this site’s future participant results.[1][2]
Who would be included in an annual report?
A release must define its collection window, eligibility, consent basis, completed-assessment rule and approach to repeated submissions before calculating results. Anonymous events cannot automatically be treated as unique people or combined into a complete eight-dimension profile. Report missing dimensions and any changes in participation instead of silently filling gaps.
Proposed window: a stated calendar year. Publish exact dates and a data-freeze date in the eventual release. Choose and document a defensible unit of analysis, such as eligible assessment completions, unless a privacy-preserving participant linkage has been reviewed and implemented. Do not deduplicate using covert fingerprints.
What would a transparent benchmark table include?
Publish the denominator and method for every statistic, and keep an empty cell explicitly unavailable until reviewed data exists. Use separate counts for each dimension and subgroup. A comparison by income needs an actual, consistently defined income field and sufficient eligible observations; a catchy headline cannot stand in for that evidence.
| Reporting item | Required definition | Current release status |
|---|---|---|
| Sample size | Eligible records by dimension and period | Not calculated |
| Median and quartiles | Score version, missing-data rule and unit of analysis | Not calculated |
| Income comparison | Income definition, sample counts and grouping rule | Not calculated |
| Year-over-year change | Comparable collection and scoring methods | No annual series published |
| Uncertainty | Method appropriate to the sampling design | Not estimated |
How should assessment data be protected before publication?
Use only data whose collection and use permit the analysis, minimize retained fields and publish aggregates rather than row-level health or financial responses. Adopt a reviewed disclosure policy for small groups and intersecting categories. Removing names alone does not guarantee anonymity, especially when rare combinations can identify a household.
This page does not authorize a new data use or change the privacy policy. A future release needs an inventory of available fields, an appropriate privacy review and documented aggregation rules. It should include a data dictionary and versioned methods so others can understand what was actually measured.
Can a future report say high earners have low time or mental wealth?
Only if reviewed data supports that defined comparison, with adequate counts, clear income categories and transparent limitations. Even then, an association among self-selected participants would not show that income caused the difference or that the result describes all high earners. Differences in who participates may explain apparent trends.
Until those requirements are met, treat “high earners score low on time and mental wealth” as a research question. Do not quote it as a 2026 finding. The future report should publish a corrections policy and distinguish original participant results from external research and illustrative calculations.
How do you put this guide into practice?
Use this sequence to turn the framework into an observable decision. Record your starting point, the assumptions behind your choice and a date to review the result. A small, reversible step can reveal practical constraints before you commit more money, time or effort to the same approach.
Define the research plan
Specify the question, dates, unit of analysis, score versions and eligibility before analysis.
Review permissible data use
Check consent, collection purpose, available fields and disclosure risk before extracting data.
Calculate and verify aggregates
Document missingness, repeat records, denominators and appropriate uncertainty without inventing missing values.
Publish a versioned release
Release reviewed tables, methods, limitations, data dictionary and a corrections process together.
Common questions
Are there published 2026 Wealth Dimensions Index results here?
No. This page contains a proposed methodology and an unfilled reporting template. It contains no original participant statistics or verified high-earner comparison.
Would assessment participants represent the general population?
Not automatically. A voluntary visitor sample is self-selected. Report its selection limits and avoid national claims unless a suitable sampling design supports them.
Related guides
Sources
- Why financial well-being?, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- American Time Use Survey, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
This guide is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not financial, medical, legal, or tax advice. Consult a qualified professional for guidance specific to your situation.