Antigua and Barbuda vs Sri Lanka: Competitive elections

Antigua and Barbuda
1
in 2025
Sri Lanka
1
in 2025
Antigua and Barbuda rank
1st
Sri Lanka rank
1st

Competitive elections over time

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Sri Lanka
00.20.40.60.81178919072025

How they compare

Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 1 against 1 in Sri Lanka, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 75 shared years of data; in 1951 it was Sri Lanka ahead.

Antigua and Barbuda ranks 1st and Sri Lanka ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Across the 8 decades both report, Antigua and Barbuda averaged higher in 1 and Sri Lanka in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade Antigua and Barbuda Sri Lanka Difference Ahead
1950s 0 1 1 Sri Lanka
1960s 0.3 1 0.7 Sri Lanka
1970s 1 1 0
1980s 0 0.3 0.3 Sri Lanka
1990s 0 1 1 Sri Lanka
2000s 0.6 1 0.4 Sri Lanka
2010s 1 0.5 0.5 Antigua and Barbuda
2020s 1 1 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitive elections, Antigua and Barbuda or Sri Lanka?
Antigua and Barbuda, at 1 against 1 in Sri Lanka as of 2025.
What is the difference in competitive elections between Antigua and Barbuda and Sri Lanka?
0, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Sri Lanka?
75 years are reported by both, from 1951 to 2025.
How do Antigua and Barbuda and Sri Lanka rank globally for competitive elections?
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 1st and Sri Lanka ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Competitive elections. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Competitive elections
Source
Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
198 places, 32,485 data points, 1789–2025
Last refreshed

Whether the outcomes of elections are uncertain because their timing is not violated, voters are not systematically coerced, and election fraud is not consequential.