Everyone loves a list, especially a list of the world?s plutocrats. This year, US fat cats have fallen behind. To the victor, go the spoils.

Back in 2007, the last surge in emerging market stocks before the credit crisis briefly made Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecom magnate, the richest man. Then the crisis supervened. Emerging markets sold off more than others and he was overtaken by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. With markets becoming safe for risk takers once more over the past year, Slim could no longer be denied. On March 11, the Forbes list of billionaires confirmed that he was again the world?s wealthiest man, with net worth topping $53.5billion.

Slim, who came to the rescue of the NYT in 2009, beat Gates, Microsoft?s cofounder and last year?s number one, and Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, for the top spot. Gates? and Buffett?s net worths were $53 billion and $47 billion respectively. Chart I clearly shows the out-performance of America Movil, Slim?s main vehicle and the dominant telephony operator in Latin America over Berkshire Hathaway and Microsoft.

Chart II indicates the out-performance of the Mexico IPC, the main index of the Mexican stock exchange (roughly a third of its market capitalisation is made up of companies controlled by Slim) over the S&P 500 and the MSCI Bric Index. This is despite the fact that the Mexican economy has been stagnant for many years, while the fashionable Brics have been at the epicentre of investor interest.

The top 10 rich list includes a Brazilian and two Indians. China and Russia have more billionaires than anywhere outside the US, with 64 and 62 respectively. This reflects the growing power of emerging economies. Brics continue to churn out far more new billionaires than the developed West.

Although Russia and Brazil fared well, Asia supplied most of the 97 billionaires making their debut on the Forbes list in 2010, minting 62 new contenders. The region now has just 14 fewer than Europe.

Forget the have-yachts for a minute and consider the have-nots. The GDP of the most 40 heavily indebted poor countries is less than the wealth of the world?s 13 richest people combined. And, at $29 billion, Asia?s richest man?Mukesh Ambani, controlling shareholder of petrochemicals group Reliance Industries?has assets equivalent to twice the official GDP of Afghanistan.

A better indication of progress than billionaire production is, of course, the rate at which developing economies succeed in pulling the bottom billion out of poverty and in lifting per capita GDP. In India and China, politicians are more focused on social inclusion.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao seems resolved to reverse the income gap, echoing the mantra of India?s ruling Congress party. With growth rates averaging about 8% in India over the past five years and more in China, the ranks of the middle classes are expanding rapidly. But so are political tensions caused by rising inequality. To become rich is glorious, but not if it leaves others too far behind.

For the first time, China, with 64 billionaires, is the country with the most members outside of the US, which has 403, followed by Russia with 62. Judging by the number of new tycoons, the rich have rebounded from the 2009 doldrums, reflecting the recovery in the global economy. If you look at the number of billionaires a country has and how the country is faring, they go hand in hand. The number of billionaires a country has is a leading indicator of how the country will fare in the coming year. Although the number of billionaires failed to surpass 2008 levels, the tally of the world?s richest jumped to 1,011 from 793 last year. Average net worth rose $500 million to $3.5 billion.

Mukesh Ambani landed the number four spot, up from seventh. Lakshmi Mittal, owner of ArcelorMittal, secured the fifth spot with $28.7 billion, up from eighth last year. Li Ka Shing of Hong Kong, the world?s 16th richest person in 2009, also rose two spots to secure the 14th position. Zong Qinghou, chairman of Hangzhou Wahaha Group, is the richest person in mainland China with a personal wealth of $7 billion and ranked 103rd globally. Forbes said the net worth figures were based on a broad range of assets including real estate, art, jewellery collections, cash, investable assets and debt.

At first glance, this is good news for emerging markets. Certainly the rise in the price that investors will pay for stocks like Slim?s America Movil has much to do with the increase in his wealth. But maybe not.

After all, Slim benefits from what Buffett calls a wide moat. Many of his companies are state-protected monopolies or continued to be formal monopolies long enough for him to build an insuperable competitive position. Mexicans may not feel wildly happy about his wealth when they pay their phone bills. The rich list is dominated by Slim-style or Buffett-style investors rather than entrepreneurs. The secret of successful investing has always been to find inefficient markets and exploit them. Emerging markets still offer more market inefficiencies than the rest of the world. This raises the animal spirits of canny investors.

Emerging markets are again riding high, and onlookers have been speculating for months now about whether a new bubble might be forming. Clearly, Slim?s fortune mushrooms when emerging markets post strong growth?and perhaps it peaks when price levels get a little heady. Were market conditions to rupture, I don?t think credit markets would be the epicentre this time, so I?m not suggesting new problems would mirror those of 2007-09. All the same, it is worth considering whether the Carlos Slim Indicator might have something to tell us about the valuation of emerging market assets, and what that in turn might say about the trajectory of asset classes more broadly.

According to EPFR, investors withdrew almost $5 billion from emerging market equity funds in February. This reversal came at the same time as heightened risk sensitivity due to the Greek debt crisis and concerns that China would tighten monetary policy to tackle bubbles. Investors are likely to stay shy of China until there is greater assurance that monetary conditions are effective in arresting inflationary pressure.

This more recent pull-back from emerging market funds is in contrast to investor behaviour last year, when China and other emerging markets set the pace for the global stock market recovery after the global credit crisis. In 2010 so far, the US has led stock markets globally, coincident with falling Treasury yields and a stronger dollar as part of a so-called flight to quality. There is now a widely held expectation that emerging economies are entering an interest rate tightening phase.

One Asian market that has benefited from the change in risk perception is Japan. Japanese mutual funds saw inflows of $360 million in February. Increasing interest in Asia?s perennially underachieving asset class has been confirmed by European institutional investors as judged by the spate of RFPs (requests for proposals) circulating the industry since the beginning of the year. Whether this renewed interest in Japan will be justified by economic and market fundamentals remains the moot question.

Investors in Asian emerging markets often reference global economy leading indicators such as those published by the OECD. These peaked in January, slightly ahead of the fund flow reversal. However, of more significance is whether the global recovery is maintained. In previous recoveries, emerging markets have been able to overcome an initial correction and post respectable gains for another 12-18 months.

While not cheap, Asian markets appear fairly valued with earnings continuing to expand at about 20% annualised. On the assumption that global recovery does not falter, underlying economic growth across Asia will continue at a pace despite modest central bank policy tightening. Slim and his wealth will keep gaining weight in emerging economy stocks.

The author is a Wharton Business School MBA and CEO, Global Money Investor