Company research
How much US large-cap revenue is foreign — and how few companies actually say
Everyone quotes a figure for how much of US large-cap revenue comes from abroad. Almost nobody says which companies it was computed over — and once you try, you find that a large minority disclose a geographic split too vague to use at all.
132 companies with a usable split · FY2025
FY2025
- Foreign share, weighted
- 16.3%
- over $6.2T of revenue
- Foreign share, median company
- 21.0%
- the middle company, not the index
- Usable disclosure
- 132 of 375
- 35% of the universe
- Unusable or absent
- 243
- 147 too vague · 96 none at all
Revenue earned outside the United States, revenue-weighted. Sectors where fewer than 5 companies disclose a usable split are left out of the chart and kept in the table below — a bar drawn from three companies is a fact about those three
- Real Estate31.0%6 of 14
- Communication Services25.2%7 of 14
- Industrials23.1%22 of 55
- Financial Services20.8%19 of 57
- Technology18.7%21 of 80
- Consumer Cyclical17.2%15 of 30
- Healthcare17.2%26 of 45
- Consumer Defensive7.8%6 of 20
- Energy3.5%5 of 25
| Sector | Foreign, weighted | Foreign, median | Companies | Disclose anything | Usable split | Revenue covered |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic Materials | 68.6% | — | 13 | 11 | 4 | $80B |
| Real Estate | 31.0% | 12.6% | 14 | 9 | 6 | $71B |
| Communication Services | 25.2% | 4.3% | 14 | 11 | 7 | $627B |
| Industrials | 23.1% | 25.1% | 55 | 47 | 22 | $514B |
| Financial Services | 20.8% | 26.1% | 57 | 32 | 19 | $544B |
| Technology | 18.7% | 13.0% | 80 | 71 | 21 | $706B |
| Consumer Cyclical | 17.2% | 26.3% | 30 | 24 | 15 | $674B |
| Healthcare | 17.2% | 27.1% | 45 | 37 | 26 | $1,062B |
| Utilities | 11.4% | — | 22 | 4 | 1 | $14B |
| Consumer Defensive | 7.8% | 6.3% | 20 | 17 | 6 | $1,092B |
| Energy | 3.5% | 0.0% | 25 | 16 | 5 | $847B |
| Fiscal year | Foreign, weighted | Foreign, median | Companies |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 17.0% | 21.0% | 128 |
| 2024 | 17.4% | 20.2% | 121 |
| 2023 | 17.6% | 22.0% | 119 |
| 2022 | 18.3% | 19.9% | 120 |
| 2021 | 18.9% | 21.4% | 121 |
| 2020 | 17.7% | 23.7% | 111 |
| 2019 | 17.5% | 22.8% | 109 |
| 2018 | 20.7% | 21.7% | 107 |
| 2017 | 18.2% | 26.2% | 113 |
| 2016 | 19.4% | 27.1% | 104 |
| 2015 | 19.0% | 34.9% | 99 |
| Company | Revenue outside the US | Revenue | Fiscal year |
|---|---|---|---|
| DHR Healthcare | 100.0% | $15B | 2025 |
| SYK Healthcare | 100.0% | $6B | 2025 |
| MAR Consumer Cyclical | 100.0% | $6B | 2025 |
| NOC Industrials | 100.0% | $5B | 2025 |
| FERG Industrials | 100.0% | $1B | 2025 |
| CCL Consumer Cyclical | 100.0% | $8B | 2025 |
| MTD Healthcare | 100.0% | $1B | 2025 |
| NEM Basic Materials | 99.6% | $21B | 2025 |
| MPWR Technology | 96.5% | $3B | 2025 |
| MCO Financial Services | 93.3% | $7B | 2025 |
| LRCX Technology | 92.5% | $18B | 2025 |
| BKNG Consumer Cyclical | 89.4% | $24B | 2025 |
| AMAT Technology | 89.2% | $28B | 2025 |
| WTW Financial Services | 76.6% | $19B | 2025 |
| LIN Basic Materials | 64.2% | $34B | 2025 |
| Company | Revenue outside the US | Revenue | Fiscal year |
|---|---|---|---|
| OKTA Technology | 0.0% | $3B | 2025 |
| RDDT Communication Services | 0.0% | $2B | 2025 |
| P Industrials | 0.0% | $3B | 2025 |
| BIIB Healthcare | 0.0% | $6B | 2025 |
| EME Industrials | 0.0% | $17B | 2025 |
| DXCM Healthcare | 0.0% | $1B | 2025 |
| TWLO Technology | 0.0% | $5B | 2025 |
| KMB Consumer Defensive | 0.0% | $10B | 2025 |
| EXPE Consumer Cyclical | 0.0% | $9B | 2025 |
| TTWO Technology | 0.0% | $6B | 2025 |
| CRWV Technology | 0.0% | $5B | 2025 |
| AZO Consumer Cyclical | 0.0% | $19B | 2025 |
| AXON Industrials | 0.0% | $3B | 2025 |
| XYZ Technology | 0.0% | $24B | 2025 |
| STT Financial Services | 0.0% | $14B | 2025 |
Largest US-listed operating companies by market capitalisation, one line per company, foreign private issuers (ADRs and 20-F filers) excluded. Full provenance, method and a citation line are in Sources and method below. The universe and every filing behind them are listed in full.
The number everyone quotes, and the reason nobody should quote it precisely
Of the 375 companies in this universe, 132 publish a FY2025 geographic split that resolves into United States and not-United States. 147 publish one that does not — their segments are called "Americas" or "North America", which contain the US plus an undisclosed amount of Canada and Latin America — and 96 publish no geographic split at all. Every widely quoted figure for foreign revenue share is computed over some subset of this mess, almost always without saying which.
Over the companies that do resolve, 16.3% of revenue in FY2025 was earned outside the United States on a revenue-weighted basis, against a median company at 21.0%. Those two are far apart and both are correct: the biggest companies sell much more abroad than the typical one, so the weighted figure describes the index and the median describes a company.
The trend is the part to read most carefully. Between FY2015 and FY2025 the weighted share moved from 19.0% to 17.0%, a change of 2.0 points over 10 years — a drift, not the retreat from globalisation the commentary would suggest. Read the company count in each row before reading the line: disclosure changes from year to year, and a change in the sample looks exactly like a change in the world.
What this does not measure: where anything is made. A company that books every dollar of revenue in the United States can still buy every input abroad, and a tariff hits the second thing. This is a map of where customers are, which is the first question and not the whole one.
Questions people ask about this
- Why can't every company be included?
- Because there is no standard for the labels. Companies report segments called "United States", "Non-US", "EMEA", "Americas" or "International" as they see fit. "Americas" and "North America" cannot be split — they mix the US with an undisclosed amount of Canada and Latin America — so any company whose split depends on them is left out of the share calculation rather than guessed at. How many that is, is on the page.
- Why is the revenue-weighted figure so different from the median?
- Because size and foreign exposure go together. The largest companies in this universe sell far more of their output abroad than the typical one, so weighting by revenue produces a much higher number than taking the middle company. Quoting either alone is misleading; the page shows both and says which is which.
- Does this measure exposure to tariffs or a weaker dollar?
- It is where revenue is booked, which is a starting point and not the answer. It says nothing about where production happens, where costs sit, or how much is hedged — a company selling entirely in the US can still have every input priced abroad. Read it as a map of demand, not of risk.
Sources and method
- Data
- SEC filings (EDGAR) — Each company's annual report on Form 10-K. Every company named on the page links to the filing its figures were read from.
- Financial Modeling Prep — Distributor of the filing data, and the source of the market caps used to pick the universe.
- How it was calculated
- Same universe as the other filing pages. Each company's own geographic revenue segmentation is read for each fiscal year and every segment label is classified as United States, non-United States, or unusable; a company counts towards the share only when less than 2% of its revenue lands in the third bucket. Labels such as "Americas" and "North America" are always unusable because they mix the US with other countries. The weighted share is total foreign revenue over total revenue of the qualifying companies; the median is the middle qualifying company. Counts of companies disclosing nothing, disclosing only unusable labels, and disclosing a clean split are published beside the shares.
- How often it changes
- Rebuilt from the filings about once a year, after the bulk of the universe has reported. The fiscal year it runs through is at the top of the page.
- Citing this page
Free to quote — please link rather than copy the table.
Plutux. "How much US large-cap revenue is foreign — and how few companies actually say." Data through FY2025. https://plutux.ai/resources/tools/foreign-revenue-exposure
Historical figures for information only — not investment advice, and not a forecast.
Related tools
- Revenue per employeeA decade of revenue against the headcount each company actually reported, and the point where the two stopped moving together.
- Buybacks vs dilutionTen years of share issuance and repurchase, netted off — the part of a buyback that only cancels out the shares just granted.
- World market correlationsA correlation matrix for twelve national indices — monthly, daily, and daily with the time-zone offset removed.
Plutux is not an investment adviser. Market data and AI-generated analysis are for information and education only, not investment advice. Disclaimer