Guyana vs Sao Tome and Principe: Competitive elections

Guyana
1
in 2025
Sao Tome and Principe
1
in 2025
Guyana rank
1st
Sao Tome and Principe rank
1st

Competitive elections over time

  • Guyana
  • Sao Tome and Principe
00.20.40.60.81178919072025

How they compare

Guyana currently reports 1 against 1 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.

Across all 134 years both countries report, Sao Tome and Principe has been ahead every year.

Guyana ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 14 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guyana Sao Tome and Principe Difference Ahead
1890s 0 0 0 β€”
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 0 0 0 β€”
1920s 0 0 0 β€”
1930s 0 0 0 β€”
1940s 0 0 0 β€”
1950s 0 0 0 β€”
1960s 0 0 0 β€”
1970s 0 0 0 β€”
1980s 0 0 0 β€”
1990s 0.8 0.9 0.1 Sao Tome and Principe
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, Guyana or Sao Tome and Principe?
Guyana, at 1 against 1 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2025.
What is the difference in competitive elections between Guyana and Sao Tome and Principe?
0, with Guyana ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guyana and Sao Tome and Principe?
134 years are reported by both, from 1892 to 2025.
How do Guyana and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for competitive elections?
Guyana ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe 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.