Honduras vs South Africa: Competitive elections

Honduras
1
in 2025
South Africa
1
in 2025
Honduras rank
1st
South Africa rank
1st

Competitive elections over time

  • Honduras
  • South Africa
00.20.40.60.81183819312025

How they compare

Honduras currently reports 1 against 1 in South Africa, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 126 shared years of data; in 1900 it was South Africa ahead.

Honduras ranks 1st and South Africa ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Across the 13 decades both report, Honduras averaged higher in 4 and South Africa in 7.

Head to head by decade

Decade Honduras South Africa Difference Ahead
1900s 0 0 0
1910s 0 1 1 South Africa
1920s 0.1 1 0.9 South Africa
1930s 0.4 1 0.6 South Africa
1940s 0 1 1 South Africa
1950s 0.3 0 0.3 Honduras
1960s 0.3 0 0.3 Honduras
1970s 0 0 0
1980s 0.8 0 0.8 Honduras
1990s 1 0.6 0.4 Honduras
2000s 0.9 1 0.1 South Africa
2010s 0.4 1 0.6 South Africa
2020s 0.8333 1 0.1667 South Africa

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitive elections, Honduras or South Africa?
Honduras, at 1 against 1 in South Africa as of 2025.
What is the difference in competitive elections between Honduras and South Africa?
0, with Honduras ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Honduras and South Africa?
126 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
How do Honduras and South Africa rank globally for competitive elections?
Honduras ranks 1st and South Africa 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.