Distribution of well-being: accumulation
The differences between population groups for the individual indicators do not necessarily relate to the same people. At the individual level, outcomes can accumulate across different themes. Many people have a higher well-being in some areas and lower well-being in others. For some people, we observe an accumulation of outcomes: they have high well-being or low well-being for many themes.
- The accumulation of favourable outcomes is concentrated among people who have completed higher education (university or HBO), but also among people with a Dutch background and people aged 45-64 years. Men are more likely to be in the higher end of the distribution than women.
- The accumulation of unfavourable outcomes occurs mainly among people whose highest level of educational attainment is primary education or VMBO, migrants from outside Europe and those aged 65-74 years. Unfavourable outcomes are slightly more likely to accumulate among women than among men.
- When we take the interrelationship between indicators into account, health is the most closely correlated with the number of favourable outcomes. After that, being in paid work has the closest association with the accumulation of favourable outcomes. Health and being in paid work are also the most closely correlated with the number of unfavourable outcomes. Trust in other people is also closely correlated with the accumulation of unfavourable outcomes.
Distribution: Accumulation
Accumulation of favourable and unfavourable outcomes
The section on Indicators examined how, for various population groups, well-being ‘here and now’ differs from that of the population as a whole on individual indicators. The fact that a population group scores below average for an indicator does not mean that all the people in that group have a low score for that indicator. For example, on average, 84.9 percent of the population are satisfied with life, but among 18 to 24-year-olds, the figure is 79.5 percent. Although this is below average, most of these young adults are still happy with their lives.
Moreover, not everyone who scores below average on one of the indicators will also do so for other indicators for which the group in question has a relatively low score. It is possible, however, that favourable or unfavourable outcomes on individual indicators are more common among the same people.
This raises the question of whether favourable and unfavourable outcomes are evenly distributed across all members of a population group, or whether the same people consistently score above or below average. In other words: do favourable or unfavourable outcomes accumulate in particular population groups? To find out whether this is the case, we examined a selection of well-being ‘here and now’ indicators per individual. For individuals with disproportionately favourable or unfavourable outcomes, we looked at the background characteristics of these individuals.
The data on how many favourable and unfavourable outcomes accumulate at the individual level is based on Statistics Netherlands’ 2025 survey on social cohesion and well-being, along with related data from the integrated income and wealth statistics for the previous year. A ‘score’ on various well-being indicators was calculated for each person. The selected indicators fall under the eight well-being ‘here and now’ themes.
The basic principle applied was to incorporate at least one indicator for each of the eight themes. In practice, this was achieved for six of the eight themes, with two indicators included for both ‘material well-being’ and ‘society’. The theme of ‘labour and leisure time’ comprises two subjects and is also described using two indicators. In total, this makes nine indicators. These are shown in the table below, which also shows when an outcome is considered favourable or unfavourable. Although the set of indicators used here is the same as in the 2025 edition of the monitor, it should be noted that they are different from the reference year 2019. For comparison purposes, some analyses have therefore been repeated for the reference year 2019. More detailed information can be found in the Technical explanation.
| Monitor-theme | Indicator | Unfavourable | Medium | Favourable |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjective well-being | Life satisfaction | Score of 1-4 | Score of 5-6 | Score of 7-10 |
| Material well-being | Standardised disposable income | Lowest 20% group | Middle 3 20% group | Highest 20% group |
| Household income | Lowest 20% group | Middle 3 20% group | Highest 20% group | |
| Health | Self-perception of health | Fair | - | Very good |
| Labour and leisure time | Net labour participation | Not in employment, aged under 75 | Not in employment, aged 75 or older | |
| Housing | Home satisfaction | Score of 1-4 | Score of 5-6 | Score of 7-10 |
| Society | Trust in people | No trust | - | Do have trust |
| Trust in instiutions (police, judges, House of Commons) | No trust in any of the three institutions | Trust in one or two institutions | ||
Overall picture
On average in 2025, people had favourable outcomes for 5.1 of the 9 indicators, neutral outcomes for 2.3 indicators and unfavourable outcomes for 1.4 indicators. For the purposes of the analysis, those with favourable well-being outcomes for 7 or more indicators constitute the top of the distribution. This group represents 21.9 percent of the population. The group of people with at least 3 unfavourable outcomes constitutes the bottom of the distribution; 18.8 percent of the population fall into this group. The remainder (59.3 percent) make up the middle of the distribution.
As a result of changes to the indicators selected and the boundaries between the upper and lower ends of the distribution, accumulation figures in pre-2022 editions of the monitor are not directly comparable with the figures in this edition. If the new selection and boundaries are applied to data from after 2019, the group of people for whom favourable outcomes converge is slightly smaller (21.9 percent in 2025, versus 24.7 percent in 2019). At no point in the years between 2019 and 2025 was this share as low as it was last year. The size of the group of people for whom unfavourable outcomes accumulate has remained almost the same (18.8 percent in 2025, versus 20.1 percent in 2019). This means that the middle group – for whom neither favourable nor unfavourable outcomes accumulate – has grown (from 55.2 percent in 2019 to 59.3 percent in 2025).
| Year | Bottom (%) | Middle (%) | Top (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 20.1 | 55.2 | 20.4 |
| 2020 | 18.8 | 53.7 | 27.5 |
| 2021 | 18.2 | 56.1 | 25.7 |
| 2022 | 18.6 | 58.7 | 22.7 |
| 2023 | 18.7 | 58 | 23.3 |
| 2024 | 18.1 | 57.6 | 24.3 |
| 2025 | 18.8 | 59.3 | 21.9 |
Accumulation by population group
The data for the differences on the individual indicators by population group showed that people’s level of educational attainment and origin are both closely correlated with above-average or below-average well-being. There are also substantial differences between age groups. The differences between men and women are relatively small, but here too we see that men are slightly more likely to have favourable outcomes. The extent to which individual members of these population groups experience the accumulation of favourable or unfavourable outcomes is described below.
Sex Age Highest completed level of education Origin/country of birth
Category
Group
unfavourable outcomes (%)
non-favourable and non-unfavourable outcomes (%)
favourable outcomes (%)
Sex Men 17,8 58,5 23,7 Sex Women 19,9 60 20,1 Age 18-24 22,8 53,7 23,5 Age 25-34 17,1 63,6 19,2 Age 35-44 18 60,9 21,2 Age 45-54 18 54,1 27,9 Age 55-64 18,7 48,7 32,5 Age 65-74 24,9 58 17,1 Age 75 and older 12,7 80,5 6,8 Highest completed level of education Low 33,3 59,7 7 Highest completed level of education Medium 18 62,7 19,3 Highest completed level of education High 8,6 56,4 35 Origin/country of birth Born in NL, parent(s) from NL 14,1 61 24,9 Origin/country of birth Born in NL, parent(s) from Europe 18,4 60,8 20,8 Origin/country of birth Born in NL, parent(s) from outside Europe 25,9 58,8 15,4 Origin/country of birth Born in Europe (exl. NL) 24,7 60 15,3 Origin/country of birth Born outside Europe 42,2 47,3 10,5
| Top | Middel | Bottom | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Total | -0.4 | 2.4 | -2 |
| Gender | Men | -0.7 | 2.5 | -1.7 |
| Gender | Women | 0 | 2.3 | -2.2 |
| Level of eduction | Primary eduction, VMBO, MBO1 | -2 | 3.1 | -1.1 |
| Level of eduction | HAVO, VWO, MBO2-4 | 0.2 | 3.3 | -3.5 |
| Level of eduction | HBO, WO | -4.1 | 4.4 | -0.3 |
| Age | 18-24 | 0.2 | 1.7 | -1.9 |
| Age | 25-34 | 1.2 | 0.7 | -2 |
| Age | 35-44 | 3.7 | -1.4 | -2.4 |
| Age | 45-54 | -0.2 | 1.6 | -1.4 |
| Age | 55-64 | 0.3 | 0.9 | -1.1 |
| Age | 65-74 | -2 | 3.8 | -2 |
| Age | 75+ | -1.9 | 3.3 | -1.3 |
| Origin/Country of birth | Born in the Netherlands, parents born in the Netherlands | 0.7 | 2.4 | -3.2 |
| Origin/Country of birth | Born in the Netherlands, parent(s) born in Europe | 5 | -7.5 | 2.6 |
| Origin/Country of birth | Born in the Netherlands, parent(s) born outside of Europe | -6.3 | 8 | -1.7 |
| Origin/Country of birth | Born in Europ (excl. the Netherlands) | 0.5 | 1 | -1.5 |
| Origin/Country of birth | Born outside of Europe | -3.1 | 3.3 | -0.2 |
Sex
Men are slightly more likely to be at the top of the distribution (24 percent) than women (20 percent). At the bottom, women are slightly more likely to experience an accumulation of unfavourable outcomes (20 percent) than men (18 percent). In particular, women are less likely than men to score favourably on health, being in paid employment and trust in other people. However, the differences between men and women are smaller than the differences between other groups. Compared to 2019, the difference in accumulated outcomes between men and women has narrowed somewhat. The proportion of men experiencing an accumulation of favourable outcomes fell by 3.7 percentage points, while the decline among women was 1.9 percentage points. Meanwhile, the proportion of men experiencing an accumulation of unfavourable outcomes decreased by 0.5 percentage points, which was slightly less than the decrease of 1.9 percentage points measured among women. The middle group has grown among both men and women since 2019.
Age
People aged 18 to 24 (23 percent) and those aged 45 to 64 (28 to 33 percent) are more likely than average to be at the upper end of the distribution. At the same time, 23 percent of young adults experience an accumulation of unfavourable outcomes, which is also relatively high. The picture is different for over-65s: 17 percent of 65 to74-year-olds and 7 percent of over-75s experience an accumulation of favourable outcomes. However, unfavourable outcomes do accumulate less than average for the latter group: 13 percent versus an average of 19 percent. This means that a relatively large number of those aged 75 and over are in the middle group (80 percent). At 25 percent, an accumulation of unfavourable outcomes is relatively common among 65- to 74-year-olds, however (compared to an average of 19 percent). For people aged 65 and over, health and trust in others determine the accumulation of favourable and unfavourable outcomes. The picture for people in this age group differs from the picture for 65 to 74-year-olds on the basis of the 13 separate well-being indicators: in the latter case, the group had slightly more favourable than unfavourable outcomes.
It is notable that the middle group has increased across all age groups since 2019. Among 18 to 24-year-olds and 35 to 44-year-olds, this is largely because the group at the top has become smaller, whereas among 25 to 34-year-olds the group at the bottom of the distribution is smaller than it was in 2019. People aged 65 to 74 in particular are more likely to be at the top of the distribution than in 2019.
Educational attainment
There are relatively large differences in terms of the accumulation of favourable and unfavourable outcomes between levels of educational attainment. Of those with a higher education degree, 35 percent are found at the top of the distribution, with high well-being, compared to 19 percent of people with a qualification from senior general secondary education (HAVO), pre-university education (VWO) or senior secondary vocational education (MBO) and 7 percent of people with a diploma of primary education or prevocational secondary education (VMBO). People in the latter group are more likely to be at the bottom of the distribution; this is the case for 33 percent of them. The proportions are significantly lower among the other two groups, at 9 percent and 18 percent, respectively. The group with a VMBO qualification or equivalent are relatively more likely to have unfavourable scores for health, being in paid employment and trust in other people. All in all, the accumulation of favourable outcomes is therefore highly concentrated among those with a higher education degree, while those with no higher than primary or VMBO education account for the greatest accumulation of unfavourable outcomes.
This picture is consistent with previous years. However, there has been a convergence towards the average across all levels of education since 2019. The groups at the top and bottom of the distributions have grown smaller or remained virtually the same size. As a result, the groups in the middle of the distribution have grown. Among those with a HAVO, VWO or MBO qualification, this middle group has grown by 4.4 percentage points; for those with a higher education degree, the figure is 6.6 percentage points.
Origin
People of Dutch origin are relatively often at the top end of the distribution, and less often at the lower end. Second-generation migrants from outside Europe, and first-generation migrants in general, are relatively often at the bottom and less often at the top of the distribution. Migrants born outside Europe are particularly likely to be at the bottom of the distribution: 42 percent compared to 19 percent of the overall population. For this group, paid employment and health are key determinants with regard to the accumulation of favourable and unfavourable outcomes. Compared to 2019, it is notable that second-generation migrants from outside Europe were significantly more likely to fall in the middle of the distribution in 2025 (10.9 percentage points). This is mainly because their share of the top group has fallen by 9.4 percentage points. For migrants from outside Europe, a similar shift towards the middle group can be seen: the middle group grew by over 3.3 percentage points at the expense of the group at the top of the distribution, which declined by 5.3 percentage points.
| Total (%) | Men (%) | Women (%) | Low (%) | Medium (%) | High (%) | Under 25 (%) | 25 to 35 (%) | 35 to 45 (%) | 45 to 55 (%) | 55 to 65 (%) | 65 to 75 (%) | Over 75 (%) | Born in NL, parent(s) from NL (%) | Born in NL, parent(s) from Europe (%) | Born in NL, parent(s) from outside Europe (%) | Born in Europe (exl. NL) (%) | Born outside Europe (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 1 | 0.3 | 1 |
| 1 | 2.7 | 2.4 | 3 | 1.8 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 1.9 | 2.6 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 2 | 2.4 | 2.7 | 3.4 | 7.3 |
| 2 | 4.7 | 4.4 | 5 | 5.5 | 3.3 | 4.1 | 5 | 5.8 | 3.9 | 5.6 | 8.9 | 4.3 | 2 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 6 | 8.8 | 9.5 |
| 3 | 10.4 | 9.9 | 10.9 | 11.4 | 10.5 | 9.9 | 8.5 | 6.7 | 11.5 | 17.3 | 17 | 10.3 | 5.6 | 9 | 11.4 | 12.7 | 15 | 15.7 |
| 4 | 17.1 | 16.1 | 18.1 | 13.7 | 16.3 | 16.7 | 15.5 | 12 | 22 | 25.9 | 25 | 17.2 | 11.5 | 15.6 | 18.4 | 19.7 | 21.1 | 23 |
| 5 | 21.8 | 22.3 | 21.4 | 21.2 | 23.8 | 20.7 | 18.6 | 17.9 | 24.5 | 28.2 | 23.4 | 23.1 | 20 | 22.7 | 17.6 | 22.6 | 19.2 | 18.3 |
| 6 | 20.9 | 21 | 20.7 | 22.5 | 23.8 | 24 | 20.7 | 21.1 | 18.7 | 13.2 | 12.8 | 22.7 | 24.7 | 22.1 | 25.2 | 19.8 | 17 | 14.7 |
| 7 | 14.1 | 14.6 | 13.6 | 15.6 | 15 | 14.2 | 17.7 | 16.7 | 11.8 | 5.5 | 5.5 | 13.4 | 21 | 15.7 | 14.6 | 9.6 | 10.7 | 8.3 |
| 8 | 6.4 | 7.4 | 5.4 | 7 | 3.7 | 6.3 | 8.1 | 12.2 | 4.3 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 5.1 | 11.2 | 7.5 | 4.5 | 4.8 | 3.6 | 1.8 |
| 9 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 2.2 | 3.7 | 1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 2.8 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1 | 1 | 0.4 |
Total (%) Men (%) Women (%) Low (%) Medium (%) High (%) Under 25 (%) 25 to 35 (%) 35 to 45 (%) 45 to 55 (%) 55 to 65 (%) 65 to 75 (%) Over 75 (%) Born in NL, parent(s) from NL (%) Born in NL, parent(s) from Europe (%) Born in NL, parent(s) from outside Europe (%) Born in Europe (exl. NL) (%) Born outside Europe (%) 0 30.1 31.6 28.6 27.5 31.5 38.5 38.4 35.3 9.7 24.5 13 29 43.1 34.1 25.8 24.4 21.7 12.8 1 30.2 29.6 30.7 26.4 30.9 26.7 26 28.7 34.9 39.7 26.5 31.2 32.5 31.7 32.2 26.8 28.9 22.6 2 20.9 21 20.8 23.3 20.4 16.8 17.6 17.2 30.5 23.1 27.2 21.7 15.7 20 23.6 23 24.6 22.5 3 10.9 10.7 11.1 13.1 9.1 9.4 9.1 9.6 16.6 10.6 17.8 11 5.6 9.3 7.9 13.5 14 18.8 4 4.6 4.1 5 5.8 4.5 4.5 5.3 4.3 5.6 1.8 8.5 4.3 1.9 3.1 4.8 7.2 6.5 11.4 5 2.3 1.9 2.8 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.4 3.9 1.9 0.3 4.9 1.8 0.8 1.2 4.6 3.5 2.1 8.2 6 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.1 1 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.5 0 1.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 1.1 1.2 2.1 2.3 7 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0 0.5 0.3 0 0.2 0 0.3 0 0.7 8 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 0 0 0.3 0 0.5 9 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2
Correlation between characteristics and indicators
The characteristics of the population (sex, age, education level and origin) are partly interrelated. For example, people born in the Netherlands with at least one parent who was born outside the Netherlands tend to be relatively young, while older people are less likely than average to have a higher education or equivalent qualification. Taking these correlations into account, education level still turns out to be most closely related to the number of indicators for which people have a favourable or an unfavourable outcome, followed by origin and age. Having a country of birth outside Europe is correlated with slightly more unfavourable indicators, and a higher age is associated with slightly more favourable indicators. The weakest correlation is with sex.
Just as the above population characteristics are interrelated, so too are the indicators of well-being. There is a correlation between income and wealth, for instance, and between perceived health and being in paid employment. If we take into account the interrelationships between indicators, we see that health is most closely correlated with the number of favourable outcomes, followed by being in paid employment and trust in other people. These three indicators are also the most closely correlated with the number of unfavourable outcomes.
For different population groups, specific indicators are more (or less) closely correlated with the number of favourable or unfavourable outcomes than average. For 45 to 54-year-olds, being in paid employment correlates more closely with the number of favourable outcomes than it does for others. For those aged 65 and over, wealth is a more important factor. For 18 to 54-year-olds, satisfaction with leisure time is a stronger determinant than it is for older age groups.
While, on average, being in paid employment, health and trust in other people are most closely correlated with the number of unfavourable outcomes, for those aged 75 and over, being in paid employment is less closely correlated and income is more closely correlated with the number of unfavourable outcomes. For people born outside Europe, trust in others is also more closely correlated with the number of unfavourable outcomes than for people of other origins.