The same industry is valued at $90 billion in one forecast and $9 trillion in another. The gap is not about optimism. It is about methodology. Different analysts are measuring different markets, and different countries are using entirely different frameworks.
The confusion begins with the terminology itself. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) refers to the movement of passengers and cargo within cities and between cities and nearby transport hubs. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is a broader concept. It covers urban, suburban and regional aviation supported by digital air traffic management and next-generation propulsion systems.
The low-altitude economy is broader still. It encompasses passenger eVTOL aircraft, drone delivery, agricultural drones, infrastructure inspection, aerial surveying, medical logistics, emergency response, manufacturing of aircraft and components, communications, navigation, insurance, training, maintenance and ground infrastructure.
That distinction explains why market estimates vary so dramatically. A valuation of a few billion dollars usually refers only to passenger transport in a limited number of cities. Hundreds of billions include aircraft manufacturing, cargo services, software and infrastructure. Trillion-dollar estimates attempt to capture the long-term value of the entire autonomous aviation ecosystem and all related industries.
The best-known forecast comes from Morgan Stanley.
Its original research estimated the total addressable market for autonomous aviation at $1.5 trillion by 2040, including passenger transportation, cargo operations and military applications. Later, the bank revised its estimate for urban air mobility to roughly $1 trillion by 2040, while extending the long-term outlook. By 2050, it sees the market reaching $9 trillion.
Those figures should not be interpreted as guaranteed future revenue from air taxis. They represent an upper-bound scenario that assumes several major developments occur simultaneously: dramatic reductions in aircraft costs, widespread autonomous flight, large-scale infrastructure deployment, the emergence of a substantial cargo market, broad public acceptance and full integration into existing transportation networks.
McKinsey takes a much more conservative view. The firm estimates that the global AAM market could reach tens of billions of dollars in the early 2030s, provided the industry successfully completes certification, proves its safety and gains access to the necessary infrastructure.
By 2030, McKinsey expects 10 to 20 manufacturers to remain in the market. Over time, however, consolidation is likely to leave roughly five dominant players, following the familiar pattern seen across capital-intensive industries. Dozens of startups compete in the early stages, but the costs of certification and mass production gradually eliminate weaker competitors.
Investment has also followed distinct cycles.
Passenger AAM companies raised around $4.8 billion in 2021, followed by another $1.2 billion during the first months of 2022. As successful pre-commercial flight testing and China’s first government certifications boosted confidence, annual investment climbed by roughly 30%, reaching a record $6.5 billion, surpassing even 2021 levels.
The average deal size more than doubled, increasing from roughly $50 million to $140 million. Investors shifted away from scattering capital across small startups and instead concentrated funding on larger rounds for companies already viewed as industry leaders.
Nor is this simply an aviation story. Companies such as Boeing, Airbus, Toyota, Hyundai, Stellantis, United Airlines, Delta Air Lines and CATL have all invested in or are actively developing the sector. Their interest reflects the convergence of several major technology trends: transport electrification, autonomous systems, on-demand logistics, smart cities, advanced materials and digital platforms.
Roland Berger offers the most cautious assessment. The consultancy notes that after the funding boom of 2021, investment slowed significantly during 2022 and 2023 as tighter financial conditions and a more realistic understanding of commercialization timelines cooled investor enthusiasm.
Its earlier projections suggested that by 2050, passenger-focused UAM could generate roughly $90 billion in annual revenue, supported by a global fleet of approximately 160,000 commercial passenger aircraft. This neatly illustrates the methodological differences between the three consulting firms.
Roland Berger’s $90 billion reflects a narrow passenger transportation market. Morgan Stanley’s $1-1.5 trillion captures the broader autonomous aviation ecosystem.
The $9 trillion figure represents a long-term scenario for the entire low-altitude economy by the middle of the century. Yet the differences do not stop there. Governments measure the market in fundamentally different ways from investment banks.
The U.S. measures jobs
In the United States, the discussion is framed around economic development. A Deloitte study prepared for the Aerospace Industries Association estimated that the U.S. AAM market could generate around $115 billion annually by 2035, while supporting approximately 280,000 jobs. These figures have since been referenced by NASA in its own work on the economic potential of advanced air mobility.
Those jobs extend far beyond pilots and air taxi operators. They include aerospace engineers, certification specialists, software developers, digital air traffic managers, manufacturing workers, infrastructure builders, battery engineers, maintenance personnel, cybersecurity specialists and logistics professionals.
NASA does not view AAM simply as a new aviation technology. It sees it as a tool for attracting investment, establishing manufacturing and operating facilities, expanding regional aviation infrastructure and improving connectivity. In other words, the American model measures the broader economic impact on regions rather than the value of flights alone.
Europe measures urban mobility
Europe approaches the market from a different perspective. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)estimates that Europe’s UAM market could reach approximately €4.2 billion by 2030. Europe is expected to account for roughly 31% of the global market, while the industry could support around 90,000 jobs.
The smaller figure reflects several important differences.
The forecast covers 2030 rather than 2035, focuses primarily on urban mobility, and assumes a gradual rollout shaped by regulation. Passenger services are considered alongside public acceptance, noise management and broader urban planning concerns.
Europe does not view UAM primarily as a technological race. Instead, it treats advanced air mobility as part of an integrated urban transportation system. Recent EASA documents published in 2025 emphasize that UAM is ultimately about city development and quality of life, not simply aviation technology. From the European regulator’s perspective, cautious and carefully managed growth is not a weakness of the model. It is the model itself.
China measures an entire industry
China operates within an entirely different framework, one that arguably changes the scale of the conversation. Rather than estimating theoretical demand or employment, Beijing measures the actual size of an emerging national industry.
According to the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC), the country’s low-altitude economy reached 1.5 trillion yuan in 2025, equivalent to roughly $211-215 billion. By 2035, authorities expect that figure to rise to approximately 3.5 trillion yuan.
Comparing global consulting forecasts with official statistics from a single country highlights an important point. Even similarly sized numbers often answer completely different questions.
How large could the global market eventually become? How much economic activity and employment could one country generate? Or how large is one nation’s low-altitude economy today? These are fundamentally different measurements.
The numbers are different because the questions are different
Trying to combine all these forecasts into a single market size is neither possible nor particularly useful. Roland Berger’s $90 billion, Deloitte’s $115 billion, EASA’s €4.2 billion, China’s 1.5 trillion yuan and Morgan Stanley’s $9 trillion are not competing forecasts of the same market. They represent five different ways of defining the industry.
A narrow passenger segment versus an entire ecosystem. One city versus an entire country. An investment bank’s long-term scenario versus official government statistics. A five-year forecast versus a twenty-five-year outlook. Until we first define what market is being measured, for which geography and over what time horizon, asking how much the low-altitude economy is “really” worth has no meaningful answer.
Lina Yegil kizi, expert of the EconomyKZ.org portal
