Antigua and Barbuda vs Sri Lanka: Universal right to vote

Antigua and Barbuda
2
in 2025
Sri Lanka
2
in 2025
Antigua and Barbuda rank
1st
Sri Lanka rank
1st

Universal right to vote over time

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Sri Lanka
00.511.52178919072025

How they compare

Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 2 against 2 in Sri Lanka, a difference of 0.

Across all 75 years both countries report, Sri Lanka has been ahead every year.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Antigua and Barbuda Sri Lanka Difference Ahead
1950s 2 2 0 β€”
1960s 2 2 0 β€”
1970s 2 2 0 β€”
1980s 2 2 0 β€”
1990s 2 2 0 β€”
2000s 2 2 0 β€”
2010s 2 2 0 β€”
2020s 2 2 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher universal right to vote, Antigua and Barbuda or Sri Lanka?
Antigua and Barbuda, at 2 against 2 in Sri Lanka as of 2025.
What is the difference in universal right to vote 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 universal right to vote?
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 Universal right to vote. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Universal right to vote
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

Indicates whether virtually all men and women that are citizens are allowed to vote in national elections (score 2), whether it is only men (score 1), or there is no universal rights to vote for either men or women (score 0). It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.