Comoros vs Singapore: Universal right to vote
Comoros
2
in 2025
Singapore
2
in 2025
Comoros rank
1st
Singapore rank
1st
Universal right to vote over time
- Comoros
- Singapore
How they compare
Comoros currently reports 2 against 2 in Singapore, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 109 shared years of data; in 1886 it was Singapore ahead.
Comoros ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 1st of 198 countries.
Comoros has averaged higher in every one of the 13 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Comoros | Singapore | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1890s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1900s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1910s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.4 | Comoros |
| 1960s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1980s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher universal right to vote, Comoros or Singapore?
- Comoros, at 2 against 2 in Singapore as of 2025.
- What is the difference in universal right to vote between Comoros and Singapore?
- 0, with Comoros ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Singapore?
- 109 years are reported by both, from 1886 to 2025.
- How do Comoros and Singapore rank globally for universal right to vote?
- Comoros ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 1st of 198 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
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.