Global Forest Value Ranking 2026
This ranking is not by revenue. Revenue mixes in boxes, tissue and consumer products — that is processing value, not the value of the forest itself. We measure one thing: how much latent value the forestland a company holds could release over the next 20 years, under the FCIM five-layer income model.
1. The model: natural forest and plantation are different assets
Natural forest can only yield thinning; plantation can be valued across five layers: canopy, timber, understory, space and carbon.
| Type | Timber | Canopy | Understory | Space | Carbon | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boreal natural forest | 210 | 14 | 28 | 14 | 42 | 308 |
| Temperate natural forest | 392 | 14 | 35 | 21 | 42 | 504 |
| Tropical protected forest | 42 | 14 | 42 | 14 | 84 | 196 |
| Tropical eucalyptus plantation | 1,713 | 42 | 112 | 14 | 70 | 1,951 |
| Temperate pine plantation | 1,399 | 42 | 84 | 28 | 70 | 1,623 |
| Boreal plantation | 671 | 28 | 56 | 21 | 56 | 832 |
2. The ranking
3. Three findings
- The revenue champion is not on this list. Smurfit Westrock and International Paper sold their timberland to REITs and TIMOs years ago — they buy wood and make packaging.
- China’s state forest regions are undervalued. Inner Mongolia, Greater Khingan and Longjiang forestry groups hold over 23 million hectares combined, ranked 3rd, 4th and 7th.
- Plantations are 5–7× more value-dense than natural forest. Suzano ranks 2nd with only 2.4 million hectares — eucalyptus yields over ten times the annual timber of boreal natural forest.
4. Notes & boundaries
Forestland figures follow public annual reports/websites (owned, long-term lease or entrusted management); the natural/plantation split is estimated; unit coefficients are FCIM model assumptions; FEV is latent annual output value, not accounting revenue, and not investment advice. Currency: USD, converted at 1 USD = 7.15 CNY.