Mongolia vs United Kingdom: Electoral democracy

Mongolia
2
in 2025
United Kingdom
2
in 2025
Mongolia rank
1st
United Kingdom rank
1st

Electoral democracy over time

  • Mongolia
  • United Kingdom
00.511.52178919072025

How they compare

Mongolia currently reports 2 against 2 in United Kingdom, a difference of 0.

Across all 115 years both countries report, United Kingdom has been ahead every year.

Mongolia ranks 1st and United Kingdom ranks 1st of 176 countries.

United Kingdom has averaged higher in every one of the 12 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mongolia United Kingdom Difference Ahead
1910s 0 1.11 1.11 United Kingdom
1920s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1930s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1940s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1950s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1960s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1970s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1980s 0 2 2 United Kingdom
1990s 1.9 2 0.1 United Kingdom
2000s 2 2 0
2010s 2 2 0
2020s 1.83 2 0.1667 United Kingdom

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher electoral democracy, Mongolia or United Kingdom?
Mongolia, at 2 against 2 in United Kingdom as of 2025.
What is the difference in electoral democracy between Mongolia and United Kingdom?
0, with Mongolia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and United Kingdom?
115 years are reported by both, from 1911 to 2025.
How do Mongolia and United Kingdom rank globally for electoral democracy?
Mongolia ranks 1st and United Kingdom ranks 1st of 176 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Electoral democracy. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Electoral democracy
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
176 places, 29,594 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

Identifies the political regime of a country using the Regimes of the World classification by political scientists Anna Lührmann, Marcus Tannenberg and Staffan Lindberg.