Methodology

Pillar 1: Standard of Living

The Standard of Living Pillar assesses the broader socioeconomic conditions and quality of life offered by the CBI jurisdictions under evaluation. This pillar is particularly relevant to applicants considering relocation and seeking a prosperous and secure environment for themselves and their families, as well as those looking to pursue local business opportunities or achieve greater geographical diversification.

A range of internationally recognised indicators is considered to provide a comprehensive assessment of living standards. Establishing an appropriate benchmark is important, as each jurisdiction must be considered both on its own merits and relative to the other countries included in the CBI Index.

Reliance is placed on the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index (HDI), which provides a broad measure of human development through indicators covering health, education and income. Economic performance is also incorporated into the assessment using data from the World Bank, providing insight into prevailing economic conditions and growth prospects, an important consideration for applicants contemplating investment, business activity or longer-term ties to a jurisdiction.

The Standard of Living Pillar additionally considers the extent to which a country promotes personal freedom and protects the ability of individuals to act and express themselves without undue constraint. Civil liberties and political rights are assessed using Freedom House’s Freedom in the World report, helping to capture dimensions of political and institutional conditions that conventional measures of economic development alone cannot reflect.

Pillar 2: Freedom of Movement

The Freedom of Movement Pillar measures the relative strength of each country’s citizenship on the basis of three equally weighted factors: the number of destinations accessible without obtaining a visa in advance; access to leading international business and financial centres; and the extent to which citizenship provides settlement rights in other jurisdictions.

Emphasis is placed on the total number of countries and territories that may be visited visa-free or with a visa on arrival, as neither requires the acquisition of a visa in advance of travel. Government and other official sources, including data from the UN World Tourism Organization, are used to establish the travel access provided by each passport under evaluation.

A passport’s ability to provide access to leading economic and financial centres is evaluated using the Index of Economic Freedom from the Heritage Foundation and the World Competitiveness Ranking from the International Institute for Management Development (IMD). This component recognises that the practical value of international mobility depends not only on the overall number of accessible destinations, but also on access to jurisdictions of particular importance for international business and investment.

Many applicants also regard alternative citizenship as a means of securing longer-term geographical flexibility for themselves and their families. The settlement rights component reflects this by considering both the number of jurisdictions accessible through a given free-movement regime and the nature of the rights afforded to citizens, with distinctions made where residence or settlement rights are conditional on employment or other requirements.

Pillar 3: Minimum Investment Outlay

The Investment Options and Threshold (IOT) Pillar assesses two of the most practical considerations associated with CBI: the minimum capital required for an investor to become eligible for their chosen programme and the range of qualifying investment routes through which that capital can be deployed.

The cost of applying for citizenship can increase substantially with the inclusion of dependents or other qualifying family members. To maintain consistency across jurisdictions, the minimum investment threshold is therefore calculated on the basis of a single applicant. Where a CBI programme offers multiple qualifying routes, the option carrying the lowest minimum investment is used to determine the threshold component of the score.

The pillar primarily considers the investment itself rather than minor ancillary costs. Application, processing and due diligence fees that do not materially alter the overall cost of obtaining citizenship are generally excluded, while sizeable additional mandatory fees are incorporated where applicable. Programmes requiring a lower minimum capital outlay receive higher scores according to the investment bands established by the Index.

As the CBI industry has developed, however, the minimum financial threshold has become only one dimension of the investment proposition. Programmes have expanded their offerings to include a wider range of qualifying routes, creating meaningful differences in how applicants are able to deploy capital. The IOT Pillar therefore also assesses the diversity of investment options offered by each programme.

Scores take into account the number of available options and whether they provide for the potential return or redemption of invested capital. The assessment also considers the availability of entrepreneurial and business-related routes, together with investment options designed to provide broader philanthropic or development benefits to the host country.

Pillar 4: Mandatory Travel or Residence

The Mandatory Travel or Residence Pillar examines the physical presence requirements imposed on applicants both before and after citizenship is granted. The extent of these obligations can materially affect programme flexibility, particularly for internationally mobile applicants who may have substantial professional, business or family commitments across multiple jurisdictions.

A detailed examination of the laws, regulations and policies governing each CBI programme is undertaken. First, the Index establishes whether mandatory travel or residence requirements apply. Second, post-citizenship obligations are examined, together with the consequences of failing to fulfil them. Third, the extent of any physical presence requirements is assessed, including visits necessary to attend an interview, swear an oath of allegiance or provide biometric information.

Importantly, physical rather than nominal requirements are taken into consideration. The assessment focuses on the main applicant rather than dependants who may be included in the citizenship application.

The scoring system combines the assessment of mandatory travel and residence requirements to produce the overall pillar score. Programmes that impose neither receive the highest scores, reflecting the greater flexibility available to applicants, followed by those with limited requirements. Programmes requiring more extensive physical presence receive lower scores.

Pillar 5: Citizenship Timeline

The Citizenship Timeline Pillar assesses the average period required for an applicant to secure citizenship. Processing times vary between programmes according to the time required to process application forms and supporting documentation, the procedures used to examine an application and the stages involved in granting final approval.

Applicable laws, regulations and official programme guidance are examined to determine the processing periods stipulated by each jurisdiction. However, stated processing times do not always provide a complete picture of applicants’ experience. Extensive reliance is therefore also placed on qualitative evidence derived from applicants, agents and other industry stakeholders to establish the timelines encountered in practice.

As providing a timely route to alternative citizenship is an important feature of CBI programmes, higher scores are awarded to programmes with shorter processing periods.

Accelerated or fast-track processing options are not awarded additional merit, recognising that speed must be considered alongside the time required to undertake comprehensive due diligence and compliance procedures.

Pillar 6: Ease of Processing

The Ease of Processing Pillar measures the end-to-end complexity of the CBI application process. Requirements differ considerably between jurisdictions, with some programmes placing substantial administrative demands on applicants while others provide a comparatively streamlined process supported by clear guidance.

Multiple indicators are considered, commencing with entry qualifications such as previous business or professional experience, a proven track record of achievement, language proficiency, or knowledge of local history and culture. By its nature as a naturalisation process, CBI also involves a significant amount of paperwork, including application forms and supporting documentation. The extent and complexity of these requirements consequently form an important component of the pillar.

The availability of clear official information can materially affect the ease with which applicants navigate these requirements. Having access to an official government website and a dedicated CBI unit from which applicants and authorised representatives can obtain clarification therefore contributes positively to a programme’s score. The duration of passport validity is also considered, with longer validity periods reducing the frequency with which successful applicants must undertake renewal procedures.

Additional administrative and legal complexity can arise where a jurisdiction requires the purchase of real estate or other assets, with such routes needing further professional consultation and supporting documentation demonstrating that a qualifying purchase has been completed. Programmes placing fewer administrative demands on applicants and providing clearer, more straightforward procedures consequently receive higher scores.

Pillar 7: Due Diligence

The Due Diligence Pillar assesses the strength and comprehensiveness of the safeguards employed by each jurisdiction to evaluate prospective citizens and protect the integrity of its CBI programme. With investment migration facing sustained international scrutiny, robust due diligence is fundamental both to programme credibility and to the ability of governments to identify applicants who may pose financial, security or reputational risks.

The CBI Index examines the mechanisms available to governments to obtain and verify information both on and from applicants. This encompasses internal and external due diligence procedures and includes police certificate requirements, including the number of jurisdictions from which certificates must be supplied, together with requirements relating to fingerprints, biometric information and other identity-verification procedures.

Particular emphasis is placed on a programme’s ability to establish and scrutinise an applicant’s source of funds. This represents an important safeguard against granting citizenship to individuals whose wealth may derive from illicit activity or who may otherwise present financial integrity concerns. The pillar assesses the safeguards and procedures embedded within the programme rather than attempting to evaluate the treatment of individual applications.

The Due Diligence Pillar also incorporates an Investment Protection measure, recognising programmes that provide a legal or regulatory basis for protecting the integrity of qualifying investments. This includes mechanisms designed to ensure that the price of a CBI real estate option reflects the underlying value of the approved project, reducing the scope for practices such as illegal discounting.

Pillar 8: Family

The Family Pillar measures the extent to which investors can acquire citizenship for members of their immediate and extended family. Family structures and dependency arrangements vary considerably, making the breadth and flexibility of provisions for qualifying dependents an important consideration when comparing CBI programmes.

While most programmes provide for the inclusion of spouses and minor children, eligibility for adult children and extended family members differs significantly. Multiple family categories are therefore considered, with points awarded according to provisions covering adult children, parents, grandparents and siblings. Additional recognition is given where programme rules extend eligibility to qualifying family members of the main applicant’s spouse.

The CBI Index also distinguishes between family members who may apply with and acquire citizenship at the same time as the main applicant and those who can become eligible at a later stage following the approval of the principal application.

The degree of flexibility within individual categories can differ substantially between programmes. In the case of adult children, for example, programmes permitting those aged 18 or over to qualify with relatively few restrictions receive greater recognition than programmes requiring evidence of a high degree of dependency. The scoring framework additionally recognises programmes that make provision for dependants living with a disability, reflecting the importance of accommodating differing family circumstances within programme rules.

Pillar 9: Certainty of Product

The Certainty of Product Pillar encompasses a range of factors designed to assess the overall strength and resilience of a CBI programme across five dimensions: longevity, popularity and renown, stability, reputation and adaptability. Particularly in an environment of heightened political and regulatory scrutiny, these measures provide investors with a means of evaluating how firmly established a programme is and the extent to which it has demonstrated resilience as industry conditions have evolved.

‘Longevity’ measures the age of a programme, recognising the track record provided by programmes that have operated over an extended period.

‘Popularity and Renown’ evaluates application and naturalisation levels alongside a programme’s wider prominence within the investment migration industry. ‘Stability’ considers factors capable of affecting programme continuity, including calls for its termination from authorities within or outside the CBI jurisdiction and whether the programme places limits on the number of applications that can be processed.

‘Reputation’ considers adverse publicity and controversies associated with a programme that may influence broader perceptions of both the programme and its host jurisdiction.

Finally, ‘Adaptability’ assesses a programme’s capacity to respond to changing applicant needs and developments in the wider operating environment. Greater recognition is given to jurisdictions that demonstrate an ability to communicate effectively with applicants, prospective applicants and stakeholders, and to adjust programme requirements in response to changing market and regulatory conditions.