Massachusetts’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.
Real GDP$640.79B2025 · #12 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth1.3%2025 · #39 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$813.59B2025 · #12 of 50 · highest first
Massachusetts over time
Explore Massachusetts readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Massachusetts officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Massachusetts effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Massachusetts change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Real GDP Massachusetts · source units
MassachusettsPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
1 of 1 reviewed Massachusetts actions match · 1 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.
Massachusetts · 2025: $640.79B · Rank #12 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T
Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Massachusetts · state comparison
Massachusetts output and growth
Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.
Massachusetts · 2025$640.79B
Massachusetts rank#12among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Real GDP
Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.
Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Massachusetts
2025 · Massachusetts: $640.79B · Rank #12 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Massachusetts Real GDP history
Period
Massachusetts
Compare
2014
$496.25B
2015
$514.4B
2016
$521.66B
2017
$530.13B
2018
$549.26B
2019
$566.28B
2020
$558.43B
2021
$596.81B
2022
$610.1B
2023
$615.42B
2024
$632.34B
2025
$640.79B
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Massachusetts stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Massachusetts has a dark outline.
Lower value · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Massachusetts · $640.79B2025 · Rank #12 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Massachusetts with every state · 50 ranked
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$3.43T
—
#2
Texas
$2.33T
—
#3
New York
$1.89T
—
#4
Florida
$1.38T
—
#5
Illinois
$948.03B
—
#6
Pennsylvania
$815.87B
—
#7
Ohio
$738.49B
—
#8
Georgia
$719.74B
—
#9
Washington
$715.88B
—
#10
New Jersey
$688.76B
—
#11
North Carolina
$682.83B
—
#12
Massachusetts · your comparison
$640.79B
—
#13
Virginia
$631.98B
—
#14
Michigan
$575.4B
—
#15
Colorado
$452.78B
—
#16
Arizona
$451.49B
—
#17
Tennessee
$447.66B
—
#18
Maryland
$437.37B
—
#19
Indiana
$422.47B
—
#20
Minnesota
$392.31B
—
#21
Wisconsin
$363.84B
—
#22
Missouri
$362.46B
—
#23
Connecticut
$297.35B
—
#24
South Carolina
$287.16B
—
#25
Oregon
$264.75B
—
#26
Louisiana
$263.89B
—
#27
Alabama
$259.46B
—
#28
Utah
$243.04B
—
#29
Kentucky
$239.51B
—
#30
Oklahoma
$216.31B
—
#31
Nevada
$210.1B
—
#32
Iowa
$204.86B
—
#33
Kansas
$178.51B
—
#34
Nebraska
$156.61B
—
#35
Arkansas
$147.93B
—
#36
Mississippi
$123.37B
—
#37
New Mexico
$122.58B
—
#38
Idaho
$103.62B
—
#39
New Hampshire
$99.06B
—
#40
Hawaii
$93.38B
—
#41
Delaware
$89.92B
—
#42
West Virginia
$84.94B
—
#43
Maine
$77.23B
—
#44
Rhode Island
$67.25B
—
#45
North Dakota
$65.27B
—
#46
Montana
$61.08B
—
#47
South Dakota
$59.87B
—
#48
Alaska
$56.34B
—
#49
Wyoming
$40.16B
—
#50
Vermont
$38.06B
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Choose an industry to compare Massachusetts’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.
Massachusetts · 2025$869.6M
Massachusetts rank#41among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output
Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.
A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Massachusetts
2025 · Massachusetts: $869.6M · Rank #41 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Massachusetts Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
Period
Massachusetts
Compare
2014
$786M
2015
$835.5M
2016
$791.9M
2017
$839.4M
2018
$831M
2019
$886.7M
2020
$830.4M
2021
$952.6M
2022
$1.13B
2023
$944.8M
2024
$893M
2025
$869.6M
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Massachusetts stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Massachusetts has a dark outline.
Lower value · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Massachusetts · $869.6M2025 · Rank #41 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Massachusetts with every state · 50 ranked
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
$50.67B
—
#2
Texas
$16.95B
—
#3
Iowa
$14.1B
—
#4
Nebraska
$10.6B
—
#5
Illinois
$9.52B
—
#6
Florida
$8.33B
—
#7
Washington
$8.05B
—
#8
Minnesota
$8.01B
—
#9
Indiana
$7.13B
—
#10
South Dakota
$7.08B
—
#11
Kansas
$7.02B
—
#12
Ohio
$7B
—
#13
Wisconsin
$6.58B
—
#14
Oregon
$6.18B
—
#15
Michigan
$6.02B
—
#16
Missouri
$5.71B
—
#17
North Carolina
$5.55B
—
#18
Idaho
$5.41B
—
#19
Pennsylvania
$4.97B
—
#20
North Dakota
$4.71B
—
#21
Georgia
$4.53B
—
#22
Oklahoma
$4.26B
—
#23
Arkansas
$4.13B
—
#24
Kentucky
$3.75B
—
#25
New York
$3.55B
—
#26
Alabama
$3.29B
—
#27
Mississippi
$2.99B
—
#28
Colorado
$2.98B
—
#29
Arizona
$2.85B
—
#30
Montana
$2.49B
—
#31
Louisiana
$2.42B
—
#32
Virginia
$2.37B
—
#33
Tennessee
$2.01B
—
#34
New Mexico
$1.7B
—
#35
South Carolina
$1.63B
—
#36
Utah
$1.59B
—
#37
Maryland
$1.31B
—
#38
New Jersey
$1.27B
—
#39
Maine
$1.2B
—
#40
Wyoming
$888.5M
—
#41
Massachusetts · your comparison
$869.6M
—
#42
Delaware
$741.1M
—
#43
West Virginia
$561.8M
—
#44
Hawaii
$553.9M
—
#45
Nevada
$551.2M
—
#46
Vermont
$536.1M
—
#47
Alaska
$488.1M
—
#48
Connecticut
$341.8M
—
#49
New Hampshire
$320.1M
—
#50
Rhode Island
$164.2M
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.
Massachusetts · 20255,020,627
Massachusetts rank#13among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total employment · jobs
BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.
Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Massachusetts
2025 · Massachusetts: 5,020,627 · Rank #13 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Massachusetts Total employment · jobs history
Period
Massachusetts
Compare
2014
4,447,852
2015
4,631,573
2016
4,710,017
2017
4,778,647
2018
4,855,419
2019
4,873,421
2020
4,601,155
2021
4,778,049
2022
4,938,725
2023
5,003,853
2024
5,014,632
2025
5,020,627
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Massachusetts stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Massachusetts has a dark outline.
Lower value · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Massachusetts · 5,020,6272025 · Rank #13 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Massachusetts with every state · 50 ranked
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
California
25,407,891
—
#2
Texas
20,639,097
—
#3
Florida
15,174,955
—
#4
New York
13,498,360
—
#5
Illinois
8,197,037
—
#6
Pennsylvania
8,150,272
—
#7
Ohio
7,394,537
—
#8
Georgia
7,184,433
—
#9
North Carolina
6,864,520
—
#10
New Jersey
6,095,348
—
#11
Michigan
5,946,187
—
#12
Virginia
5,789,397
—
#13
Massachusetts · your comparison
5,020,627
—
#14
Washington
4,879,224
—
#15
Tennessee
4,633,711
—
#16
Arizona
4,455,141
—
#17
Colorado
4,231,488
—
#18
Indiana
4,213,622
—
#19
Maryland
4,009,451
—
#20
Missouri
3,998,549
—
#21
Minnesota
3,914,167
—
#22
Wisconsin
3,855,203
—
#23
South Carolina
3,245,739
—
#24
Alabama
2,966,686
—
#25
Louisiana
2,831,737
—
#26
Kentucky
2,718,290
—
#27
Oregon
2,671,758
—
#28
Oklahoma
2,466,719
—
#29
Utah
2,458,247
—
#30
Connecticut
2,424,541
—
#31
Nevada
2,163,825
—
#32
Iowa
2,122,389
—
#33
Kansas
2,007,083
—
#34
Arkansas
1,811,561
—
#35
Mississippi
1,713,294
—
#36
Nebraska
1,410,465
—
#37
Idaho
1,238,642
—
#38
New Mexico
1,183,906
—
#39
New Hampshire
942,254
—
#40
Hawaii
925,451
—
#41
West Virginia
910,570
—
#42
Maine
898,379
—
#43
Montana
761,061
—
#44
Rhode Island
690,505
—
#45
Delaware
678,218
—
#46
South Dakota
665,420
—
#47
North Dakota
605,276
—
#48
Alaska
472,008
—
#49
Wyoming
451,906
—
#50
Vermont
439,349
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
1 of 1 reviewed Massachusetts actions · newest first
Jan 5, 2021 · H.1788 · An Act creating a multi-family housing incentive pilot program · Did not passMassachusetts Legislature · H.1788
An Act creating a multi-family housing incentive pilot program
Jan 5, 2021 · Did not pass
Rep. Sean Garballey · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
By Mr. Garballey of Arlington, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 1788) of Sean Garballey and others for legislation to establish in the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development a housing development pilot program to offer incentives to cities and towns to zone for substantial multifamily housing and/or mixed use development in transit-oriented locations. Municipalities and Regional Government.
The official Massachusetts General Court record lists this final action on January 5, 2021: No further action taken. The measure was not enacted in that General Court.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses residential rent, tenant protections, eviction, rental assistance, or housing supply and affordability. It does not establish an effect on Massachusetts's median gross rent.
Retained Massachusetts evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
By Mr. Garballey of Arlington, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 1788) of Sean Garballey and others for legislation to establish in the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development a housing development pilot program to offer incentives to cities and towns to zone for substantial multifamily housing and/or mixed use development in transit-oriented locations. Municipalities and Regional Government.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Massachusetts officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 4, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about GDP, economic growth and production from FactVote’s Massachusetts candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
2 statements from 2 candidates
2026 Massachusetts U.S. House — District 1 General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement
Over his career in Congress, Congressman Neal has been an advocate of fairness and simplification of the U.S. tax code, supporter of policies that increase the national savings rate, fought relentlessly to protect Social Security and Medicare from privatization, promoted Financial Aid Seminars for c…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Candidate statement
Candidate campaign source
Over his career in Congress, Congressman Neal has been an advocate of fairness and simplification of the U.S. tax code, supporter of policies that increase the national savings rate, fought relentlessly to protect Social Security and Medicare from privatization, promoted Financial Aid Seminars for college-bound students and families, been instrumental in economic development initiatives throughout the district, and much more.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production terms in retained, attributed source text from published Massachusetts candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Massachusetts incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Massachusetts legislators and Massachusetts’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Massachusetts’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
1 matching sponsorship or proposal · 1 Massachusetts incumbent. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Sean Garballey
Massachusetts House of Representatives, 23rd Middlesex · D–MA
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Sean GarballeyMassachusetts Legislature · H.1788
An Act creating a multi-family housing incentive pilot program
Jan 5, 2021 · Did not pass
Rep. Sean Garballey · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
By Mr. Garballey of Arlington, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 1788) of Sean Garballey and others for legislation to establish in the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development a housing development pilot program to offer incentives to cities and towns to zone for substantial multifamily housing and/or mixed use development in transit-oriented locations. Municipalities and Regional Government.
The official Massachusetts General Court record lists this final action on January 5, 2021: No further action taken. The measure was not enacted in that General Court.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses residential rent, tenant protections, eviction, rental assistance, or housing supply and affordability. It does not establish an effect on Massachusetts's median gross rent.
Retained Massachusetts evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
By Mr. Garballey of Arlington, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 1788) of Sean Garballey and others for legislation to establish in the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development a housing development pilot program to offer incentives to cities and towns to zone for substantial multifamily housing and/or mixed use development in transit-oriented locations. Municipalities and Regional Government.
Only current Massachusetts officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Massachusetts statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 4, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Massachusetts snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Massachusetts, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.