El Salvador vs Italy: Men's universal right to vote

El Salvador
1
in 2025
Italy
1
in 2025
El Salvador rank
1st
Italy rank
1st

Men's universal right to vote over time

  • El Salvador
  • Italy
00.20.40.60.81183819312025

How they compare

El Salvador currently reports 1 against 1 in Italy, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 165 shared years of data; in 1861 it was Italy ahead.

El Salvador ranks 1st and Italy ranks 1st of 197 countries.

El Salvador has averaged higher in every one of the 17 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade El Salvador Italy Difference Ahead
1860s 0 0 0 β€”
1870s 0 0 0 β€”
1880s 0.7 0 0.7 El Salvador
1890s 1 0 1 El Salvador
1900s 1 0 1 El Salvador
1910s 1 0.7 0.3 El Salvador
1920s 1 1 0 β€”
1930s 1 1 0 β€”
1940s 1 1 0 β€”
1950s 1 1 0 β€”
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, El Salvador or Italy?
El Salvador, at 1 against 1 in Italy as of 2025.
What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between El Salvador and Italy?
0, with El Salvador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Italy?
165 years are reported by both, from 1861 to 2025.
How do El Salvador and Italy rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
El Salvador ranks 1st and Italy 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.