Finland vs Papua New Guinea: Competitive elections

Finland
1
in 2025
Papua New Guinea
1
in 2025
Finland rank
1st
Papua New Guinea rank
1st

Competitive elections over time

  • Finland
  • Papua New Guinea
00.20.40.60.81180919172025

How they compare

Finland currently reports 1 against 1 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 142 shared years of data; in 1884 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.

Finland ranks 1st and Papua New Guinea ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Finland has averaged higher in every one of the 15 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Finland Papua New Guinea Difference Ahead
1880s 0 0 0 β€”
1890s 0 0 0 β€”
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 0.1 0 0.1 Finland
1920s 1 0 1 Finland
1930s 1 0 1 Finland
1940s 1 0 1 Finland
1950s 1 0 1 Finland
1960s 1 0 1 Finland
1970s 1 0.5 0.5 Finland
1980s 1 1 0 β€”
1990s 1 1 0 β€”
2000s 1 1 0 β€”
2010s 1 1 0 β€”
2020s 1 1 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitive elections, Finland or Papua New Guinea?
Finland, at 1 against 1 in Papua New Guinea as of 2025.
What is the difference in competitive elections between Finland and Papua New Guinea?
0, with Finland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Finland and Papua New Guinea?
142 years are reported by both, from 1884 to 2025.
How do Finland and Papua New Guinea rank globally for competitive elections?
Finland ranks 1st and Papua New Guinea 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.