2025 country profile

How democratic is
Angola?

Angola scores 28.4 out of 100 and ranks 145 of 179 in our independent 2025 democracy measure. Its lowest-scoring test is public participation. Explore the evidence and history below.

Democracys.org beta estimate, derived from V-Dem v16. A measure of political institutions and conditions—not a percentage of democracy or a judgment of people.

Printable country brief Compare this country

DEMOCRACYS SCORE

28.4out of 100Far from the standard

2025 rank145 of 179

10-year change+7.2

25-year change+10.6

Source-bound range20.9–35.3

Weakest areaParticipation

The source-bound range is an uncertainty guide, not a confidence interval for this combined score. How to read the range →

SCORE HISTORY

Angola, 1975–2025

The shaded area is a plain-language uncertainty guide. Treat small score differences cautiously.

About uncertainty

BEYOND THE NUMBERS

What changed on the ground?

A documented development to help interpret the institutions behind the score.

2024 context · Freedom House assessment

A new party faced barriers to entering politics

The Liberal Party obtained initial court accreditation but subsequently encountered signature and registration obstacles. The distinction matters: formally permitting multiple parties does not ensure that a new competitor can actually organize and reach voters. Freedom House also describes a reversal of earlier openings for independent media and civil society.

Read the country report · Freedom in the World 2025

AI-assisted source summary · not independently expert-reviewed

What this context does—and does not—explain

This is a selected development, not a complete political history. Its date may differ from the selected comparison period. It is not evidence that one event caused a particular number of points, and it may describe progress even when this index declines.

The scores use V-Dem. The narrative summarizes a separate assessment by Freedom House, whose definitions and coverage differ. Neither organization endorses this website. The summary is AI-assisted, source-linked, and has not received independent country-expert review. Source checked October 5, 2026.

Why democracy measures can disagree →

UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE

What drove the score?

2015–2025 · the measured story

The score for Angola rose 7.2 points, from 21.2 to 28.4 between 2015 and 2025. All five areas improved. Public reasoning contributed the largest upward push in the score calculation.

Read the political context ↓

Largest influence on the calculation

Public reasoning

The evidence rates public justification, consultation, and engagement with opposing arguments more favorably.

Area score: 25.0 → 36.8
Approx. contribution to overall change: +2.1 points

Another important influence

Participation

The evidence rates opportunities to participate through civic organizations, direct democracy, and local or regional institutions more favorably.

Area score: 9.3 → 16.4
Approx. contribution to overall change: +2.1 points

These contributions explain the calculation—not the causes. The five area scores combine several indicators; they do not identify which individual law, election, or event changed.

When did the biggest shifts appear?

The largest year-to-year movements within this period. These are changes in annual estimates, not precise dates of political events.

2016–2017+1.7 points
The overall score rose from 21.5 to 23.2. Rights and checks supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2017–2018+4.0 points
The overall score rose from 23.2 to 27.2. Public reasoning supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2020–2021−2.1 points
The overall score fell from 27.7 to 25.6. Public reasoning supplied the largest downward contribution to that year’s calculated change.

Highest published score in this window: 28.5 in 2019. Small differences may fall within the source’s uncertainty.

See all five areas and how contributions are calculated

Changes in inputs versus contributions to the overall score
Area	2015	2025	Input change	Approx. contribution
Public reasoning	25.0	36.8	+11.8	+2.1
Participation	9.3	16.4	+7.1	+2.1
Rights and checks	27.0	33.8	+6.8	+1.2
Elections	29.0	34.4	+5.4	+0.9
Political equality	19.6	23.7	+4.1	+0.9

We change the five inputs from their starting to ending values in every possible order, then average each area’s effect on the formula. This distributes the formula’s interactions (a Shapley allocation). It is a mathematical attribution, not a causal estimate.

Inputs and published scores are rounded, so contributions are approximate and may not add exactly to the displayed total. No significance test is implied. Read the full scoring method →

BENEATH THE SCORE

Five dimensions of democracy

The headline score cannot show where a political system is strong or constrained. These five tests can. Each has equal weight in the beta standard.

Free and fair elections

Can people choose their leaders through broad voting rights, honest elections, free political groups, and open public debate?

34.4

Rights and checks on power

Are basic freedoms protected, laws applied fairly, courts independent, and leaders prevented from abusing power?

33.8

Public participation

Can people shape public life through civic groups, direct voting, and meaningful local and regional government?

16.4

Public reasoning

Do leaders explain decisions, consult the public, answer opposing arguments, and consider the common good?

36.8

Political equality

Do different social groups have equal rights, access, resources, and a real chance to influence political power?

23.7

HOW TO READ THIS PROFILE

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.

The score breakdown identifies which parts of the measure changed most. The country report adds documented political context. Together they help explain the institutions at stake—but they do not prove that a specific event produced a specific number of points.

Why this score differs from other democracy indices →

What a declining score can—and cannot—tell us about democratic backsliding

A recent improvement can coexist with a long-term decline. Always compare the dates, check the linked source, and consider developments the selected narrative does not cover.

ANNUAL DATA

Angola score table

Download Angola CSV

Year	Score	Source-bound range	Elections	Rights & checks	Participation	Reasoning	Equality
2025	28.4	20.9–35.3	34.4	33.8	16.4	36.8	23.7
2024	27.7	19.8–34.3	34.2	33.7	15.9	33.6	24.1
2023	27.8	20.6–35.1	32.9	32.6	16.7	33.9	25.0
2022	27.2	20.5–34.4	32.6	32.6	16.7	32.3	24.2
2021	25.6	18.2–32.2	32.5	32.3	11.6	32.0	23.7
2020	27.7	20.4–34.5	33.6	33.8	14.0	36.4	24.4
2019	28.5	21.2–35.5	34.7	33.2	13.6	39.3	25.9
2018	27.2	19.5–33.4	35.0	32.5	13.6	34.7	23.8
2017	23.2	16.2–29.0	30.7	30.7	10.3	26.1	22.0
2016	21.5	14.7–27.0	29.0	27.0	9.6	26.1	19.6
2015	21.2	14.3–26.7	29.0	27.0	9.3	25.0	19.6
2014	21.2	14.3–26.7	29.0	27.0	9.3	25.0	19.6
2013	21.2	14.3–26.7	29.0	27.0	9.3	25.0	19.6
2012	22.1	15.0–27.7	29.4	26.4	14.2	24.7	17.7
2011	21.8	14.5–27.2	29.5	26.2	13.1	24.7	17.7
2010	20.3	13.4–25.4	21.1	26.2	13.1	24.7	17.7
2009	20.2	13.9–25.7	20.9	26.7	13.1	24.5	17.3
2008	19.5	12.5–24.2	18.1	26.4	13.2	24.8	16.6
2007	19.4	12.8–24.2	16.8	26.3	13.2	26.0	16.6
2006	19.3	12.6–24.1	16.8	25.3	13.3	26.0	16.6
2005	19.3	12.6–24.1	16.8	25.3	13.3	26.0	16.6
2004	19.2	12.6–24.1	16.5	25.1	13.3	26.0	16.6
2003	19.1	12.5–24.1	16.6	24.6	13.3	26.0	16.6
2002	17.0	10.9–21.9	15.9	23.6	13.6	16.9	15.8
2001	17.6	11.4–22.7	15.5	23.8	17.8	15.5	16.1
2000	17.8	11.7–23.0	15.5	22.9	17.8	15.3	18.1
1999	17.8	11.5–22.8	15.5	22.8	17.8	15.3	18.2
1998	17.6	11.1–22.4	15.5	22.8	17.8	14.3	18.2
1997	17.6	11.1–22.4	15.5	22.8	17.8	14.3	18.2
1996	17.6	11.1–22.4	15.5	22.8	17.8	14.3	18.2
1995	17.6	11.1–22.4	15.5	22.8	17.8	14.3	18.2
1994	17.5	11.2–22.5	15.5	22.4	17.8	14.3	18.2
1993	17.5	11.2–22.5	15.5	22.4	17.8	14.3	18.2
1992	17.9	11.2–22.6	14.6	23.2	17.4	14.7	20.1
1991	12.6	7.1–16.5	8.3	19.1	10.0	8.9	18.6
1990	10.5	5.5–13.6	7.5	17.5	5.1	7.3	18.8
1989	9.9	5.0–12.8	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	16.6
1988	9.9	5.0–12.8	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	16.6
1987	9.9	5.0–12.8	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	16.6
1986	9.9	5.0–12.8	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	16.6
1985	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1984	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1983	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1982	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1981	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1980	10.0	5.2–13.0	7.3	15.8	5.1	7.3	17.4
1979	10.0	5.4–13.1	7.3	16.2	4.7	7.3	17.4
1978	10.3	5.9–13.7	7.3	16.2	4.7	8.7	17.6
1977	10.3	5.9–13.7	7.3	16.2	4.7	8.7	17.6
1976	10.3	5.9–13.8	7.3	16.2	4.7	8.7	17.6
1975	9.9	5.2–12.9	7.3	14.8	4.7	8.0	17.8
1974	6.3	2.5–8.5	2.1	17.0	3.5	7.0	6.0
1973	6.3	2.5–8.5	2.1	16.6	3.5	6.9	6.0
1972	5.4	1.9–7.5	0.9	13.9	3.5	6.9	6.0
1971	5.4	1.9–7.5	0.9	13.9	3.5	6.9	6.0
1970	5.4	1.9–7.5	0.9	13.9	3.5	6.9	6.0
1969	5.4	1.9–7.5	0.9	13.9	3.5	6.9	6.0
1968	5.1	1.8–7.3	0.8	13.5	3.5	6.9	5.4
1967	5.1	1.9–7.4	0.8	13.5	3.5	6.9	5.3
1966	5.1	1.9–7.4	0.8	13.5	3.5	6.9	5.3
1965	5.1	1.9–7.4	0.8	13.5	3.5	6.9	5.3
1964	4.9	1.8–7.0	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1963	4.9	1.8–7.0	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1962	4.9	1.8–7.0	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1961	4.9	1.8–7.0	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1960	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1959	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1958	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1957	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1956	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1955	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1954	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1953	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1952	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1951	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1950	4.9	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.5	5.3	5.3
1949	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1948	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1947	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1946	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1945	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1944	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1943	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1942	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1941	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1940	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1939	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1938	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1937	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1936	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1935	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1934	4.8	1.8–6.8	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1933	4.8	1.8–6.9	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	5.3
1932	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	4.9
1931	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	4.9
1930	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.5	3.2	5.3	4.9
1929	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1928	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1927	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1926	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1925	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1924	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1923	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1922	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1921	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1920	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1919	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1918	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1917	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1916	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1915	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1914	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1913	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1912	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1911	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1910	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1909	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1908	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1907	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1906	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1905	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1904	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1903	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1902	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1901	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9
1900	4.7	1.7–6.7	0.8	13.4	3.2	5.3	4.9

CITE THIS PROFILE

Source and attribution

Democracys.org (2026), “Angola Democracy Score, 1900–2025,” Democracys Standard v1.0 beta; derived from Coppedge et al. (2026), V-Dem Country-Year Dataset v16.

Open source DOI

NEARBY IN THE 2025 RANKING

#143Haiti29.1 #144Uzbekistan28.8 #146Burkina Faso28.1 #147Laos27.9

All rankings

How democratic isAngola?

Angola, 1975–2025

A new party faced barriers to entering politics

Public reasoning

Participation

When did the biggest shifts appear?

Five dimensions of democracy

Free and fair elections

Rights and checks on power

Public participation

Public reasoning

Political equality

Two kinds of evidence.One clearer picture.

Angola score table

Source and attribution

How democratic is
Angola?

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.