South Africa vs Sri Lanka: Competitive elections

South Africa
1
in 2025
Sri Lanka
1
in 2025
South Africa rank
1st
Sri Lanka rank
1st

Competitive elections over time

  • South Africa
  • Sri Lanka
00.20.40.60.81178919072025

How they compare

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

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

South Africa ranks 1st and Sri Lanka ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Across the 13 decades both report, South Africa averaged higher in 5 and Sri Lanka in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade South Africa Sri Lanka Difference Ahead
1900s 0 0 0 β€”
1910s 1 0 1 South Africa
1920s 1 0 1 South Africa
1930s 1 0 1 South Africa
1940s 1 0.2 0.8 South Africa
1950s 0 1 1 Sri Lanka
1960s 0 1 1 Sri Lanka
1970s 0 1 1 Sri Lanka
1980s 0 0.3 0.3 Sri Lanka
1990s 0.6 1 0.4 Sri Lanka
2000s 1 1 0 β€”
2010s 1 0.5 0.5 South Africa
2020s 1 1 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

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