Honestly, I do not see first world ballistic missile capabilities being effectively countered by BMD programmes anytime soon. If the RN were to launch a full scale nuclear strike from the Vanguard-class SSBN's, that would be four subs firing 16 ballistic missiles each, or a total of 64 ballistic missiles, each of which can a dozen nuclear MIRV warheads. What this in turn means is that unless the full scale strike could be engaged during the boost phase before the warheads separate, the RN boomers could launch up to 768 nuclear warheads of 100 kilotons or more.
Given that the accuracy of current BMD systems suggests firing four interceptors per inbound, that would require over 3,000 interceptors to deal with just the UK's boomer's. Now if future MIRV warheads are smaller, and/or the launching ballistic missile is larger, then that could mean even more inbound warheads in the future.
At some point, the difficulties in detecting, tracking, and then accurately engaging ballistic missile warheads get to the point in which there is no real, effective BMD options. The expensive work started by the 43rd POTUS (USD$40 bil. by now, if not more) was for a comparatively limited system which could engage a small number of fairly large and inaccurate ICBM's that might be launched by Iran and/or N. Korea. What I say a small number, I am talking about ballistic missile numbers likely in the single digits with a single, non-MIRV warhead. Once capabilities are developed which multiply the number of warheads being launched/carried, it can become very easy to make the interceptor requirements unmanageable.