Equatorial Guinea vs Eswatini: Distribution of Democracy Index
Equatorial Guinea
4
in 2018
Eswatini
3
in 2018
Equatorial Guinea rank
146th
Eswatini rank
149th
Distribution of Democracy Index over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Eswatini
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 4 against 3 in Eswatini, a difference of 1.
That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 1.3 times Eswatini's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 51 shared years of data; in 1968 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 146th and Eswatini ranks 149th of 167 countries.
Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Eswatini | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 7.5 | 2 | 5.5 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1970s | 3 | 0.7 | 2.3 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1980s | 3 | 1.8 | 1.2 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1990s | 4 | 2.7 | 1.3 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2000s | 4 | 3 | 1 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2010s | 4 | 3 | 1 | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher distribution of democracy index, Equatorial Guinea or Eswatini?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 4 against 3 in Eswatini as of 2018.
- What is the difference in distribution of democracy index between Equatorial Guinea and Eswatini?
- 1, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Eswatini?
- 51 years are reported by both, from 1968 to 2018.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Eswatini rank globally for distribution of democracy index?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 146th and Eswatini ranks 149th of 167 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Distribution of Democracy Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
It combines information on the extent to which open, multi-party, and competitive elections choose a chief executive who faces comprehensive institutional constraints, and political participation is competitive. It ranges from 0 to 20 (fully democratic).