Nevada
West
State Power #26/51Per-capita #28
State Power
39.0
of 100 · #26
SPI
39.0
SCC
40.2
SDI
41.4
Pillar profile
Talent32.2
Capital36.1
Research28.9
Infrastructure62.3
Agentic41.4
Nearest peers (per-capita)
- Rhode Island40.9
- Indiana38.9
- Tennessee38.2
- Delaware42.3
- New Hampshire43.1
Report · generated from Nevada's indicators
Nevada, standing in full
Nevada is the #32 state by economic size ($210bn GSP) and ranks #26/51 on absolute State Power and #28/51 on per-capita intensity. No pillar stands out as a clear strength; the binding concern is research.
Economic & scale context
GDP
$210bn
#32 of 51
GDP / capita
$66k
Population
3.2M
AI investment
$3.8bn
#24 of 51
Notable AI orgs
14
Index & pillar read
| Index / pillar | Value | Standing | What a high vs low value means, and where Nevada sits |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPI State Power | 39.0 | Moderate · #26/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a heavyweight that anchors national AI capacity and pulls in capital and talent; low would mean limited absolute weight, a smaller node leaning on capacity built in larger states. ▲ high: a heavyweight that anchors national AI capacity and pulls in capital and talent · ▼ low: limited absolute weight, a smaller node leaning on capacity built in larger states |
| SCC State Coefficient | 40.2 | Moderate · #28/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean deep capability per resident, a concentrated, high-intensity AI economy; low would mean thin intensity per resident, capability is sparse relative to population. ▲ high: deep capability per resident, a concentrated, high-intensity AI economy · ▼ low: thin intensity per resident, capability is sparse relative to population |
| SDI State Agentic | 41.4 | Moderate · #28/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean agents are widely deployed locally, a near-term productivity multiplier; low would mean agentic deployment is shallow, the local agent lever is under-used. ▲ high: agents are widely deployed locally, a near-term productivity multiplier · ▼ low: agentic deployment is shallow, the local agent lever is under-used |
| Talent Talent | 32.2 | Developing · #34/51 | Low here, a shallow talent base that constrains how much can be built locally. ▲ high: a deep talent pool, the scarcest input to building AI · ▼ low: a shallow talent base that constrains how much can be built locally |
| Capital Capital | 36.1 | Moderate · #23/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean abundant capital flowing into building cognitive infrastructure; low would mean thin investment, good ideas struggle to scale locally. ▲ high: abundant capital flowing into building cognitive infrastructure · ▼ low: thin investment, good ideas struggle to scale locally |
| Research Research | 28.9 | Developing · #36/51 | Low here, a weak research base, fewer home-grown breakthroughs and spinouts. ▲ high: a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people · ▼ low: a weak research base, fewer home-grown breakthroughs and spinouts |
| Infrastructure Infrastructure | 62.3 | Moderate · #21/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean the physical and digital rails to run AI at scale are in place; low would mean infrastructure gaps cap how much AI can actually be run locally. ▲ high: the physical and digital rails to run AI at scale are in place · ▼ low: infrastructure gaps cap how much AI can actually be run locally |
| Agentic Agentic | 41.4 | Moderate · #28/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean agents are actively deployed, an early-mover productivity edge; low would mean little agentic deployment, the near-term lever is unused. ▲ high: agents are actively deployed, an early-mover productivity edge · ▼ low: little agentic deployment, the near-term lever is unused |
Strengths to build on
- No pillar stands out as a clear strength yet.
Risk factors
- Binding weakness, Research 28.9 (#36/51, Developing): a weak research base, fewer home-grown breakthroughs and spinouts.
▲
State values are curated v1 estimates on a consistent scale, not yet measured sub-national data.