Is GDP a good indicator of vulnerability to natural disasters?

Economic income and Gross Domestic Produce (GDP) is often a very useful indicator of vulnerability of an institution (may that be a country, communtiy or household) to a natural disaster. Economic income can tell us how likely it is that people can recover from the disaster, for example if a household has savings and multiple incomes, this can be used to rebuild their lives after. Also, it can be assumed that if a country has a lot of money they would be less vulnerable as they can afford to build safer, more resistant buildings that fit building regulations and are less likely to collapse, or flood walls. However this is not always the case, as even richer countries do not always spend money on mitigating the disaster. Most of the time money goes towards the high-profile response to the disaster, with only 4% of funding going towards mitigation. A more holistic view would be that to measure vulnerability many factors have to be taken into account, for example quality and totpgraphy of land (is it resistant or prone to flooding?), human capital (are people well educated on the risks?), institutional capacity (will the government provide appropriate support?) etc. It is essential that measuring vulnerability takes into account agency, and individuals ability to respond to a disaster instead of labelling them as passive victims. There needs to be a combination of social factors taken into account as well as physical and natural ones.