Monaco vs Namibia: Universal right to vote
Monaco
2
in 2025
Namibia
2
in 2025
Monaco rank
1st
Namibia rank
1st
Universal right to vote over time
- Monaco
- Namibia
How they compare
Monaco currently reports 2 against 2 in Namibia, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 142 shared years of data; in 1884 it was Namibia ahead.
Monaco ranks 1st and Namibia ranks 1st of 198 countries.
Monaco has averaged higher in every one of the 15 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Monaco | Namibia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1890s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1900s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1910s | 0.5 | 0 | 0.5 | Monaco |
| 1920s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Monaco |
| 1930s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Monaco |
| 1940s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Monaco |
| 1950s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Monaco |
| 1960s | 1.8 | 0 | 1.8 | Monaco |
| 1970s | 2 | 0 | 2 | Monaco |
| 1980s | 2 | 0 | 2 | Monaco |
| 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, Monaco or Namibia?
- Monaco, at 2 against 2 in Namibia as of 2025.
- What is the difference in universal right to vote between Monaco and Namibia?
- 0, with Monaco ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Monaco and Namibia?
- 142 years are reported by both, from 1884 to 2025.
- How do Monaco and Namibia rank globally for universal right to vote?
- Monaco ranks 1st and Namibia 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.