2025 country profile

How democratic is
Guatemala?

Guatemala scores 63.5 out of 100 and ranks 67 of 179 in our independent 2025 democracy measure. Its lowest-scoring test is political equality. 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

63.5out of 100Substantial but incomplete

2025 rank67 of 179

10-year change+10.9

25-year change+11.6

Source-bound range56.6–71.6

Weakest areaEquality

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

SCORE HISTORY

Guatemala, 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

An opposition transfer was followed by transparency initiatives

Bernardo Arévalo assumed the presidency after running on an anticorruption platform. His administration introduced measures to make executive decisions and government contracting more transparent. These developments concern both access to office and scrutiny once in office, while entrenched corruption and threats to journalists remained important constraints.

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 Guatemala rose 10.9 points, from 52.6 to 63.5 between 2015 and 2025. All five areas improved. Political equality contributed the largest upward push in the score calculation.

Read the political context ↓

Largest influence on the calculation

Political equality

The evidence rates the distribution of political influence, rights, and access across social groups more favorably.

Area score: 30.7 → 43.5
Approx. contribution to overall change: +3.3 points

Another important influence

Public reasoning

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

Area score: 57.9 → 71.5
Approx. contribution to overall change: +2.6 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.

2017–2018−2.9 points
The overall score fell from 51.6 to 48.7. Public reasoning supplied the largest downward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2023–2024+11.9 points
The overall score rose from 47.7 to 59.6. Rights and checks supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2024–2025+3.9 points
The overall score rose from 59.6 to 63.5. Public reasoning supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.

Highest published score in this window: 63.5 in 2025. 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
Political equality	30.7	43.5	+12.8	+3.3
Public reasoning	57.9	71.5	+13.6	+2.6
Rights and checks	68.6	81.4	+12.8	+2.3
Participation	51.6	60.7	+9.1	+1.8
Elections	58.7	63.7	+5.0	+1.0

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?

63.7

Rights and checks on power

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

81.4

Public participation

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

60.7

Public reasoning

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

71.5

Political equality

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

43.5

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

Guatemala score table

Download Guatemala CSV

Year	Score	Source-bound range	Elections	Rights & checks	Participation	Reasoning	Equality
2025	63.5	56.6–71.6	63.7	81.4	60.7	71.5	43.5
2024	59.6	51.8–68.0	60.9	79.4	58.1	64.3	38.9
2023	47.7	38.9–55.8	50.6	60.3	47.5	47.5	34.4
2022	46.2	37.4–53.9	50.9	54.2	48.5	49.6	30.1
2021	48.7	40.2–56.9	55.5	58.6	52.6	48.3	31.4
2020	50.9	42.5–59.1	58.9	63.7	53.2	49.2	32.7
2019	49.3	40.2–57.2	59.7	65.0	49.7	47.9	28.9
2018	48.7	40.3–56.9	60.2	64.4	49.6	42.0	31.2
2017	51.6	43.3–59.7	62.1	67.8	49.5	53.5	29.8
2016	52.6	44.8–61.0	62.6	68.7	51.6	54.1	30.7
2015	52.6	45.0–61.0	58.7	68.6	51.6	57.9	30.7
2014	51.9	43.7–59.8	57.2	67.7	50.4	57.0	31.1
2013	51.6	44.0–60.2	57.4	66.9	50.4	57.0	30.7
2012	51.0	43.2–59.4	57.6	62.7	50.9	58.6	29.6
2011	52.2	44.6–60.4	58.1	62.8	50.9	61.6	31.3
2010	52.8	45.1–60.9	58.3	63.4	51.3	63.6	31.3
2009	52.6	45.0–61.2	58.0	63.5	51.8	62.5	31.4
2008	52.7	44.9–61.1	58.2	63.4	52.2	62.5	31.4
2007	52.4	44.7–60.7	56.3	63.4	52.6	62.5	31.0
2006	52.1	44.3–60.2	55.2	62.5	53.1	62.5	31.0
2005	52.2	44.2–60.2	55.2	62.7	53.5	62.5	31.0
2004	52.1	44.3–60.2	55.2	61.8	54.0	62.5	31.0
2003	51.9	44.1–60.1	54.3	61.3	54.4	62.5	31.0
2002	51.9	44.1–60.1	54.2	61.3	54.4	62.5	31.0
2001	51.9	44.2–60.3	54.2	61.3	54.4	62.5	31.0
2000	51.9	44.2–60.2	54.2	61.1	54.4	62.5	31.0
1999	50.8	43.6–58.9	49.1	50.9	56.3	71.8	30.7
1998	49.9	42.9–58.5	48.9	49.7	56.7	67.5	30.7
1997	49.8	42.7–58.3	48.9	49.4	56.7	67.5	30.7
1996	48.7	40.9–56.3	45.4	48.4	61.6	60.5	31.2
1995	46.1	37.5–53.1	41.2	48.1	61.6	54.6	28.8
1994	44.6	36.3–52.0	39.6	46.7	61.6	49.5	28.8
1993	42.5	34.3–50.0	38.5	44.6	53.3	49.5	28.8
1992	42.0	33.7–49.6	38.2	42.4	53.3	49.5	28.8
1991	41.7	33.6–49.4	38.2	42.4	53.7	47.9	28.8
1990	41.4	33.3–49.0	37.1	43.0	55.4	47.9	26.8
1989	39.8	31.9–47.3	37.0	40.5	52.5	47.9	24.2
1988	39.8	31.9–47.3	37.0	40.5	52.5	47.9	24.2
1987	37.9	29.9–44.9	37.0	40.5	52.5	47.9	17.5
1986	34.0	26.3–41.8	34.5	34.2	44.0	44.3	17.4
1985	21.3	15.0–26.3	14.9	19.9	40.7	20.6	14.6
1984	17.3	11.6–21.6	12.5	17.1	29.1	15.7	13.9
1983	15.3	9.9–19.4	9.5	16.6	24.6	15.4	12.2
1982	15.0	10.0–19.2	10.9	16.0	26.5	11.5	12.2
1981	17.1	11.7–21.6	16.3	18.5	29.9	11.5	12.2
1980	17.6	11.8–21.9	16.3	18.5	29.9	13.3	12.4
1979	17.8	12.1–22.2	16.3	18.6	31.2	13.3	12.4
1978	18.1	12.2–22.5	16.5	18.7	32.7	13.3	12.4
1977	19.6	13.5–24.4	17.0	22.1	32.7	16.7	12.4
1976	20.0	14.0–25.1	17.0	22.6	34.5	16.7	12.4
1975	19.6	13.5–24.3	17.4	22.8	34.5	14.3	12.4
1974	18.9	13.1–23.6	17.3	22.4	30.8	14.3	12.4
1973	19.8	13.6–24.4	17.3	22.7	27.1	21.2	12.4
1972	19.8	13.7–24.5	17.1	22.8	27.1	21.2	12.4
1971	19.8	13.7–24.5	17.1	22.8	27.1	21.2	12.4
1970	20.3	13.9–25.2	17.6	22.8	31.0	19.9	12.4
1969	21.5	15.2–26.7	18.4	24.5	33.6	21.2	12.4
1968	21.5	15.2–26.7	18.4	24.6	33.6	21.2	12.4
1967	21.5	15.2–26.7	18.4	25.0	33.6	21.2	12.4
1966	19.0	12.9–23.7	12.8	24.9	30.0	17.9	12.4
1965	14.3	9.4–18.3	8.6	19.2	27.0	8.5	12.2
1964	14.4	9.3–18.5	8.8	19.2	27.8	8.1	12.2
1963	14.9	9.9–19.1	10.2	19.9	28.8	8.1	11.7
1962	17.6	12.4–22.5	15.6	22.9	30.5	11.0	11.7
1961	17.8	12.5–22.6	15.7	23.6	30.5	11.0	11.7
1960	18.1	12.7–22.6	15.4	23.6	32.6	11.0	11.7
1959	18.0	12.4–22.5	15.4	24.0	32.6	11.0	11.2
1958	18.0	12.4–22.5	15.2	24.0	32.6	11.0	11.2
1957	17.0	11.5–21.3	10.1	23.1	31.5	13.3	11.2
1956	15.9	10.3–19.9	8.6	23.1	31.5	10.3	11.2
1955	15.8	10.4–19.8	7.9	19.4	32.4	11.0	13.0
1954	35.2	27.8–41.8	24.3	29.2	44.4	58.7	24.8
1953	44.3	37.6–51.7	37.3	38.4	47.3	78.0	27.5
1952	46.2	39.4–54.1	38.0	46.9	47.3	78.0	27.5
1951	46.3	39.5–54.1	38.1	47.2	47.3	78.0	27.5
1950	45.9	38.9–53.8	38.1	47.2	45.4	78.0	27.5
1949	46.0	38.9–53.8	38.1	47.9	45.4	78.0	27.5
1948	46.2	39.1–54.0	39.0	48.0	45.4	78.0	27.5
1947	46.4	39.4–54.4	38.9	49.2	45.4	78.0	27.5
1946	45.9	39.0–53.6	36.1	49.5	45.4	78.0	27.5
1945	44.0	37.4–51.3	29.2	49.6	44.1	78.0	27.5
1944	18.2	12.5–23.6	13.6	24.1	17.6	22.1	14.7
1943	9.3	5.5–12.2	9.8	18.0	15.8	3.0	4.9
1942	9.1	5.2–11.8	9.8	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1941	9.1	5.2–11.8	9.8	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1940	9.1	5.2–11.8	9.8	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1939	9.1	5.3–11.8	9.6	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1938	9.1	5.3–11.8	9.6	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1937	9.1	5.3–11.8	9.6	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1936	9.2	5.3–11.9	9.9	18.2	16.5	3.0	3.8
1935	9.7	5.8–12.4	10.0	18.4	19.8	3.0	3.8
1934	8.0	4.6–10.3	10.2	18.4	8.9	3.0	3.8
1933	8.0	4.6–10.3	10.2	18.4	8.9	3.0	3.8
1932	8.0	4.6–10.3	10.2	18.4	8.9	3.0	3.8
1931	8.9	5.3–11.5	10.4	18.3	9.6	5.7	3.8
1930	11.4	6.9–14.6	12.9	23.1	10.5	10.6	4.1
1929	12.9	7.8–16.4	13.7	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1928	12.9	7.8–16.4	13.7	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1927	12.9	7.8–16.4	13.7	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1926	12.9	7.8–16.5	13.7	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1925	12.9	7.8–16.4	13.6	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1924	12.9	7.8–16.4	13.6	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1923	12.9	7.9–16.5	14.0	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1922	12.7	7.6–16.2	12.5	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1921	12.6	7.5–15.9	12.0	23.2	11.5	15.4	4.6
1920	8.7	4.9–11.1	11.0	22.0	9.9	2.1	4.6
1919	7.4	4.1–9.5	9.5	17.7	9.9	1.2	4.5
1918	7.3	4.0–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1917	7.3	4.0–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1916	7.3	4.1–9.5	9.6	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1915	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1914	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1913	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1912	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1911	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1910	7.3	4.1–9.4	9.5	17.2	9.9	1.2	4.5
1909	7.1	3.9–9.1	9.2	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1908	7.1	3.9–9.1	9.2	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1907	7.1	3.9–9.1	9.2	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1906	7.1	3.8–9.1	9.2	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1905	7.1	3.8–9.1	9.2	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1904	7.1	3.9–9.1	9.3	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1903	7.2	3.9–9.2	9.5	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1902	7.2	3.9–9.2	9.5	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1901	7.2	3.9–9.2	9.5	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5
1900	7.2	3.9–9.2	9.5	16.7	9.5	1.2	4.5

CITE THIS PROFILE

Source and attribution

Democracys.org (2026), “Guatemala 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

#65Argentina63.6 #66Mongolia63.6 #68Kenya63.5 #69Vanuatu62.9

All rankings

How democratic isGuatemala?

Guatemala, 1975–2025

An opposition transfer was followed by transparency initiatives

Political equality

Public reasoning

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.

Guatemala score table

Source and attribution

How democratic is
Guatemala?

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.