Ohio
Midwest
State Power #13/51Per-capita #21
State Power
59.6
of 100 · #13
SPI
59.6
SCC
49.5
SDI
51.5
Pillar profile
Talent40.8
Capital43.3
Research52.5
Infrastructure59.3
Agentic51.5
Nearest peers (per-capita)
- Michigan49.0
- Arizona52.3
- Florida52.7
- Rhode Island44.7
- New Hampshire43.9
Report · generated from Ohio's indicators
Ohio — standing in full
Ohio is the #7 state by economic size ($820bn GSP) and ranks #13/51 on absolute State Power and #21/51 on per-capita intensity. No pillar stands out as a clear strength; no single pillar is a binding weakness.
Economic & scale context
GDP
$820bn
#7 of 51
GDP / capita
$70k
Population
11.8M
AI investment
$7.0bn
#15 of 51
Notable AI orgs
32
Index & pillar read
| Index / pillar | Value | Standing | What a high vs low value means — and where Ohio sits |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPI State Power | 59.6 | Strong · #13/51 | High here — a heavyweight that anchors national AI capacity and pulls in capital and talent. ▲ 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 | 49.5 | Moderate · #21/51 | 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 | 51.5 | Moderate · #22/51 | 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 | 40.8 | Moderate · #24/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a deep talent pool — the scarcest input to building AI; low would mean 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 | 43.3 | Moderate · #20/51 | 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 | 52.5 | Moderate · #18/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people; low would mean 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 | 59.3 | Moderate · #22/51 | 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 | 51.5 | Moderate · #22/51 | 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
- No acute structural gaps stand out across the state pillars.
▲
State values are curated v1 estimates on a consistent scale — not yet measured sub-national data.