Cote d'Ivoire vs Paraguay: Men's universal right to vote

Cote d'Ivoire
1
in 2025
Paraguay
1
in 2025
Cote d'Ivoire rank
1st
Paraguay rank
1st

Men's universal right to vote over time

  • Cote d'Ivoire
  • Paraguay
00.20.40.60.81181119182025

How they compare

Cote d'Ivoire currently reports 1 against 1 in Paraguay, a difference of 0.

Across all 133 years both countries report, Paraguay has been ahead every year.

Cote d'Ivoire ranks 1st and Paraguay ranks 1st of 197 countries.

Paraguay has averaged higher in every one of the 14 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cote d'Ivoire Paraguay Difference Ahead
1890s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1900s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1910s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1920s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1930s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1940s 0 1 1 Paraguay
1950s 0.3 1 0.7 Paraguay
1960s 1 1 0 β€”
1970s 1 1 0 β€”
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 men's universal right to vote, Cote d'Ivoire or Paraguay?
Cote d'Ivoire, at 1 against 1 in Paraguay as of 2025.
What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Cote d'Ivoire and Paraguay?
0, with Cote d'Ivoire ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cote d'Ivoire and Paraguay?
133 years are reported by both, from 1893 to 2025.
How do Cote d'Ivoire and Paraguay rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
Cote d'Ivoire ranks 1st and Paraguay ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Men's 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
Men's 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 all men are allowed to vote in national elections. It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.