Results by nation

Scenario tests

Each scenario run against each nation’s capability scores: 197 nations, 10 load tests, 10 capture tests, two indices and 7 archetypes. Downside scenarios get a load test: how far the nation’s capability index falls. Upside scenarios get a capture test: how much of the gain the nation takes, net of what it loses.

Read with care

Third illustrative run, on the second-pass scenario set. The capability scores are candidate ratings and the test settings were drafted with the scenario records in the second pass; neither has been adopted. Scores are from the GINC National Capability Index 2026, which describes them as candidate ratings. Exposure is set nation by nation from the CIA World Factbook 2025 and the scenario’s regional exposure. Results show the method working on real scores; they are not findings about any nation. How the tests work.

All results (CSV)The indices (CSV)

Three ways to run a scenario against a nation

A scenario can be run against a nation's capability scores in three ways. Each answers a different question.

Test	Load test	Reverse stress test	Capture test
The question	What happens to this nation under this scenario?	What would it take to produce this outcome?	How much of the upside does this nation capture?
Direction	Forward: fix the shock, read the damage	Reverse: fix the outcome, find the conditions	Forward: fix the opportunity, read the share
Fixed	The scenario at Standard Severe	The outcome: a basket of capabilities falling or rising	The scenario at Standard Severe
Solved for	Stressed scores and tier shifts	The routes to the outcome, ranked by likelihood	Capture rate and net position
Used for	Downside scenarios; comparison across nations	Failure and prosperity outcomes; a nation's own planning	Upside scenarios; the gainers in downside ones
Headline result	'Two domains fall a tier; energy fails first'	'Energy security falls a band most likely through a supply shock and a chokepoint closure together'	'Captures 40 per cent of the gain; grid capacity is the limit'

All three use the same inputs

Baseline: The nation's capability scores and domain tiers from the Atlas.
Load: The scenario's loading table, mapped from working domains to the capabilities beneath them through the domain map. High, Medium and Low become a size of shock.
Exposure: How directly the scenario reaches this nation, from 0 to 1. It starts from the scenario's regional exposure and is refined by Atlas metrics that the scenario's own parameters name: the share of crude arriving through one strait, months of import cover, the share of the budget funded by aid.
Absorption: How much of the shock the nation's buffers soak up, from 0 to 1. Buffers are the capabilities the scenario's stakeholder actions point to: stockpiles, fiscal space, backup power, surge capacity.
Policy response: The grammar's ninth slider: none, current plans executed, or best practice.

The three are complementary, not alternatives. The load test runs every nation against every downside scenario and is the comparable public result. The capture test does the same for the upside scenarios. The reverse stress test is built on both: it takes the falls from the load test and the gains from the capture test and asks which combinations of them produce an outcome a government cares about. How the tests work.

Vulnerability and opportunity

Two indices sum up a nation's results. Vulnerability is its expected loss: each downside scenario's fall, as a share of the nation's baseline capability, weighted by how likely the scenario is. The most vulnerable nation is 100. Opportunity is its likelihood-weighted net position across the upside scenarios, from −100 to +100. The dashed lines are the medians.

Find a nation

Region

Archetype

Group (10 years)

197 of 197 nations

Nation	Archetype	Vulnerability 10 years	3 years	Worst case	Tail	Breadth	Absorbed	Policy dividend	Opportunity 10 years	3 years	Best case	Group	Weakest link
South Sudan	Acute fragility	100.0	100.0	−64.7% S05	−62.6%	0/10	5%	+0.30	−33.5	−33.7	−2 S16	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Somalia	Acute fragility	95.3	95.3	−72.0% S06	−62.3%	0/10	5%	+0.34	−13.1	−13.1	+2 S15	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Nauru	Acute fragility	89.6	88.9	−51.2% S03	−50.3%	8/10	8%	+0.39	−15.3	−14.9	+4 S15	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Afghanistan	Acute fragility	89.1	89.1	−67.8% S06	−61.7%	0/10	6%	+0.29	−15.1	−14.7	−0 S16	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Yemen	Acute fragility	87.7	87.2	−70.8% S06	−60.9%	0/10	5%	+0.32	−14.6	−14.6	+2 S14	Exposed	Energy Infrastructure 2 of 10
Holy See	Acute fragility	77.4	76.7	−40.1% S10	−38.7%	10/10	7%	+0.28	−24.6	−24.5	+4 S20	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Kiribati	Acute fragility	77.3	76.7	−45.0% S03	−42.3%	4/10	10%	+0.38	−12.6	−12.1	+3 S15	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Eritrea	Acute fragility	71.9	71.9	−45.9% S06	−44.1%	8/10	7%	+0.33	−14.7	−14.3	+3 S15	Exposed	Monetary & Currency Capability 2 of 10
Haiti	Acute fragility	71.7	71.6	−55.4% S07	−49.1%	0/10	7%	+0.34	−22.2	−21.8	+3 S15	Exposed	Advanced Materials & Manufacturing 1 of 10
Tuvalu	Acute fragility	71.3	70.7	−43.0% S08	−42.1%	2/10	9%	+0.34	−14.5	−14.0	+2 S20	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Micronesia	Acute fragility	66.6	66.1	−42.7% S03	−38.5%	3/10	11%	+0.35	−12.2	−11.6	+4 S14	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Central African Rep.	Acute fragility	66.1	66.0	−48.8% S05	−45.1%	0/10	7%	+0.26	−13.2	−13.1	+2 S15	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Marshall Islands	Acute fragility	63.6	63.1	−39.7% S03	−38.0%	10/10	11%	+0.36	−16.2	−15.9	+4 S20	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Syria	Acute fragility	61.2	60.5	−48.0% S06	−41.0%	9/10	8%	+0.31	−9.4	−9.2	+4 S14	Exposed	Monetary & Currency Capability 2 of 10
Guinea-Bissau	Fragile and exposed	59.0	58.8	−41.8% S06	−39.0%	10/10	9%	+0.28	−10.3	−10.3	+2 S15	Exposed	Energy Infrastructure 2 of 10
Sudan	Fragile and exposed	56.0	55.8	−50.0% S06	−40.5%	9/10	9%	+0.34	−14.8	−14.8	+6 S16	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Djibouti	Fragile and exposed	54.6	54.4	−34.8% S06	−32.6%	8/10	14%	+0.38	−7.1	−7.1	+7 S14	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Comoros	Fragile and exposed	53.9	53.7	−46.4% S06	−37.0%	9/10	10%	+0.28	−10.3	−10.3	+3 S15	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Burundi	Fragile and exposed	52.0	51.9	−35.8% S03	−33.5%	9/10	11%	+0.29	−8.2	−8.1	+4 S11	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Palau	Fragile and exposed	51.5	51.1	−32.3% S10	−30.6%	10/10	13%	+0.32	−17.0	−16.6	+4 S20	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Vanuatu	Fragile and exposed	49.4	48.9	−32.8% S03	−30.1%	6/10	14%	+0.32	−10.3	−9.7	+5 S14	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Tonga	Fragile and exposed	48.6	48.3	−32.3% S03	−27.3%	10/10	14%	+0.34	−14.6	−14.2	+3 S20	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Solomon Islands	Fragile and exposed	48.6	48.2	−34.3% S03	−31.2%	10/10	13%	+0.31	−13.3	−12.5	+5 S14	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
São Tomé & Príncipe	Fragile and exposed	47.8	47.5	−30.2% S06	−28.0%	10/10	13%	+0.30	−9.3	−9.2	+4 S11	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10
Laos	Fragile and exposed	47.3	47.0	−29.7% S03	−25.3%	8/10	15%	+0.38	−12.8	−12.2	+11 S14	Exposed	Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies 2 of 10

Showing 1–25 of 197 nations · page 1 of 8

Hover a column heading for its definition. Each likelihood band is turned into a probability at the midpoint of its range; band 5, which is open-ended, is taken as 40 per cent. For scenarios that strike one nation at a time, a nation's probability is the scenario's probability scaled by its exposure relative to the average nation, so that more exposed nations are also more likely to be struck. Scenarios are treated as independent. They are not: one can trigger another, so the sum overstates some combinations and misses compounding. Worst case and tail are shares of the baseline index. Download the indices as CSV.

Seven archetypes

Nations with similar results across all 20 scenarios fall into seven groups. Archetypes are found, not assigned. Nations are grouped by k-means clustering on their results in all 20 scenarios, each scenario standardised so that none dominates. The names and descriptions are GINC's reading of each group. An archetype describes a pattern of results in this run; it is not a judgement of a nation.

Anchors

27 nations

Absorb most shocks and take most of the upside.

High-capability economies with deep buffers. No downside scenario costs them more than a few per cent of their capability, and their own buffers absorb more than half of every shock. They are ready for the gains that reward research and health systems: the automated discovery step, the chronic disease advance and the outbreak defence. Their lead is narrowest in a breadbasket failure, hybrid coercion and a disaster in the core, and they gain little from the scenarios built for catch-up, such as a debt service reset.

baseline: 14.5
vulnerability: 7
opportunity: +30
worst case: −4%
absorbed: 56%

Furthest behind others in: Breadbasket failure, Hybrid coercion, Core disaster
Holds up best in: Cryptographic trust break, Severe pandemic
Gains most from: Automated discovery step, Chronic disease advance, Outbreak defence succeeds
Gains least from: Debt service reset, Water-efficient food leap

Climbers

39 nations

Low vulnerability, and gains from open markets and digital public services.

Large and mid-sized emerging economies and the smaller European states, with working institutions and room to grow. They lose little in most downside scenarios and absorb about two fifths of each shock. They gain most from a public service leap, a market access opening and a working outbreak defence. Hybrid coercion, a breadbasket failure and a disaster in the core are where they sit furthest behind the leaders, and debt relief and the food leap largely pass them by.

baseline: 9.9
vulnerability: 12
opportunity: +8
worst case: −8%
absorbed: 40%

Furthest behind others in: Hybrid coercion, Breadbasket failure, Core disaster
Holds up best in: Severe pandemic, Legitimacy rupture
Gains most from: Public service leap, Market access opening, Outbreak defence succeeds
Gains least from: Debt service reset, Water-efficient food leap

Holding ground

40 nations

Mid-table on vulnerability; the upside mostly passes them by.

Middle-income states, many of them small or in Europe’s neighbourhood, Central Asia and the Caribbean. Their buffers hold against a legitimacy rupture and a breadbasket failure better than their income would suggest, while hybrid coercion, a cryptographic trust break and a trade bloc rupture find them more exposed. Cheap clean power and a public service leap are within reach; the health and food upsides are not aimed at them.

baseline: 6.2
vulnerability: 24
opportunity: −11
worst case: −16%
absorbed: 26%

Furthest behind others in: Hybrid coercion, Cryptographic trust break, Trade bloc rupture
Holds up best in: Breadbasket failure, Legitimacy rupture
Gains most from: Clean power threshold, Public service leap, Outbreak defence succeeds
Gains least from: Water-efficient food leap, Chronic disease advance

Fuel-dependent

15 nations

Budgets built on oil, gas and commodities: two of the upside scenarios are their downside.

Hydrocarbon and commodity exporters with thin buffers. A funding seizure or a regional war that closes a sea route hurts them less than it hurts others, because they are suppliers. A trade bloc rupture, a legitimacy rupture and a disaster in the core hurt them more. Their distinguishing feature is on the other side: a Middle East settlement and cheap clean power, both gains for most of the world, are losses for them, which gives this group the lowest opportunity of the seven.

baseline: 3.8
vulnerability: 35
opportunity: −27
worst case: −25%
absorbed: 16%

Furthest behind others in: Trade bloc rupture, Legitimacy rupture, Core disaster
Holds up best in: Regional war spillover, Global funding seizure
Gains most from: Water-efficient food leap, Debt service reset, Chronic disease advance
Gains least from: Clean power threshold, Middle East settlement

Stretched developers

27 nations

Exposed to food and funding shocks; debt relief and better yields are their upside.

Lower-middle-income developing economies, most of them in Africa and South Asia, with institutions that work under strain. A breadbasket failure, a legitimacy rupture and a funding seizure are their hardest tests. They hold up better against a trade bloc rupture and hybrid coercion, which reach them less directly. A debt service reset, the food leap and a Middle East settlement are their upside; the research and health-defence upsides need capabilities they do not yet have.

baseline: 6.0
vulnerability: 22
opportunity: −3
worst case: −15%
absorbed: 25%

Furthest behind others in: Breadbasket failure, Legitimacy rupture, Global funding seizure
Holds up best in: Hybrid coercion, Trade bloc rupture
Gains most from: Debt service reset, Water-efficient food leap, Middle East settlement
Gains least from: Outbreak defence succeeds, Automated discovery step

Fragile and exposed

35 nations

Highly vulnerable importers of fuel, finance and food.

Low-income and small island states with weak buffers, which absorb about a seventh of a shock. A regional war that closes a sea route, a funding seizure and a breadbasket failure each remove a large share of what capability they have, because they import their fuel, their finance and their food. A debt service reset, cheap clean power and a Middle East settlement reach them, though delivery limits how much they capture.

baseline: 3.4
vulnerability: 43
opportunity: −11
worst case: −30%
absorbed: 15%

Furthest behind others in: Regional war spillover, Global funding seizure, Breadbasket failure
Holds up best in: Hybrid coercion, Trade bloc rupture
Gains most from: Debt service reset, Clean power threshold, Middle East settlement
Gains least from: Public service leap, Outbreak defence succeeds

Acute fragility

14 nations

Every scenario is severe; there is little capability left to lose.

States in conflict or collapse, and the smallest micro-states, where many capabilities are absent. Every downside scenario removes a large share of a very low baseline, and almost none of the upside reaches them, because capturing a gain needs the capabilities they lack. For the micro-states this is partly an artefact: several capabilities do not apply to them.

baseline: 1.9
vulnerability: 78
opportunity: −17
worst case: −53%
absorbed: 7%

Furthest behind others in: AI labour shock, Severe pandemic, Regional war spillover
Holds up best in: Trade bloc rupture, Global funding seizure
Gains most from: Clean power threshold, Middle East settlement, Water-efficient food leap
Gains least from: Public service leap, Debt service reset

Archetype by scenario

Each archetype's mean result in every scenario: the share of the capability index lost in the downside scenarios, and the net position in the upside ones.

Archetype	01 S01 Critical trade divides into rival blocs: mean share of index lost	02 S02 A global funding seizure reaches sovereign balance sheets: mean share of index lost	03 S03 A regional war closes a globally important sea route: mean share of index lost	04 S04 Hybrid coercion ends in an infrastructure blackout: mean share of index lost	05 S05 A disputed transfer of power breaks effective government: mean share of index lost	06 S06 Two breadbasket failures trigger a food availability crisis: mean share of index lost	07 S07 A major disaster disables the national economic core: mean share of index lost	08 S08 An AI deployment step causes abrupt labour displacement: mean share of index lost	09 S09 A cryptographic breakthrough invalidates digital trust: mean share of index lost	10 S10 A novel respiratory pathogen exceeds health surge capacity: mean share of index lost	11↗ S11 A creditor agreement releases fiscal capacity: mean net position	12↗ S12 A cross-regional market access compact redirects investment: mean net position	13↗ S13 A great-power agreement lowers economic security barriers: mean net position	14↗ S14 A verified Middle East settlement restores access: mean net position	15↗ S15 Cheap firm clean power becomes available at scale: mean net position	16↗ S16 A validated farming package raises water-efficient output: mean net position	17↗ S17 AI-directed research produces a reproducible discovery step: mean net position	18↗ S18 A public service platform reaches inclusive operation: mean net position	19↗ S19 Affordable preventive treatments reduce chronic illness: mean net position	20↗ S20 A live outbreak proves rapid distributed pandemic defence: mean net position
Anchors	-2.9%	-2.4%	-4.0%	-2.7%	-1.9%	-1.8%	-2.3%	-3.8%	-3.7%	-3.8%	0	+21	+25	+30	+41	+11	+46	+14	+38	+54
Climbers	-5.3%	-4.6%	-6.8%	-4.5%	-4.8%	-3.6%	-4.9%	-6.9%	-7.2%	-7.0%	+1	+7	+1	+13	+13	+4	+1	+7	+10	+29
Holding ground	-11.0%	-9.3%	-13.6%	-7.9%	-9.9%	-6.5%	-9.2%	-12.7%	-12.6%	-13.5%	−2	−12	−16	−5	−4	−13	−21	−6	−11	+8
Fuel-dependent	-18.9%	-15.6%	-11.6%	-10.3%	-21.6%	-19.1%	-18.7%	-17.6%	-16.7%	-20.3%	−1	−29	−22	−40	−65	−3	−38	−16	−12	−4
Stretched developers	-7.6%	-10.1%	-13.0%	-4.8%	-12.3%	-12.9%	-10.4%	-10.8%	-9.8%	-11.0%	+8	−7	−9	+4	+3	+13	−23	−3	−3	+3
Fragile and exposed	-16.5%	-19.1%	-26.6%	-10.0%	-22.3%	-23.3%	-18.8%	-20.3%	-17.7%	-21.2%	0	−15	−19	+1	+2	−2	−28	−14	−14	−4
Acute fragility	-29.9%	-32.3%	-44.2%	-19.8%	-41.4%	-43.3%	-36.7%	-36.0%	-30.5%	-37.6%	−6	−22	−26	−4	−7	−8	−32	−20	−17	−5

Smaller to larger fallSmaller to larger net gain

Scenario by scenario

Scenario	Family	Test	Likelihood, 3 years · 10 years	Typical nation	Hardest hit or least gain	Most exposed region	Spread
Trade bloc rupture S01	AEconomic and trade	Load	4% · 15%	−0.53	−1.12	Indo-Pacific −0.67	149 nations lose a domain band
Global funding seizure S02	AEconomic and trade	Load	4% · 15%	−0.52	−0.86	Africa −0.62	140 nations lose a domain band
Regional war spillover S03	BGeopolitical and security	Load	4% · 15%	−0.79	−1.22	South Asia −0.82	152 nations lose a domain band
Hybrid coercion S04	BGeopolitical and security	Load	4% · 15% per nation	−0.35	−0.71	Russia and Eurasia −0.52	117 nations lose a domain band
Legitimacy rupture S05	BGeopolitical and security	Load	1% · 3% per nation	−0.62	−1.01	Africa −0.77	146 nations lose a domain band
Breadbasket failure S06	CEnergy, climate and resources	Load	4% · 15%	−0.44	−1.31	Africa −0.80	133 nations lose a domain band
Core disaster S07	CEnergy, climate and resources	Load	1% · 3% per nation	−0.52	−1.12	Latin America and Caribbean −0.66	146 nations lose a domain band
AI labour shock S08	DTechnology and infrastructure	Load	4% · 15%	−0.66	−1.17	Indo-Pacific −0.75	163 nations lose a domain band
Cryptographic trust break S09	DTechnology and infrastructure	Load	0% · 3%	−0.63	−0.95	Russia and Eurasia −0.76	158 nations lose a domain band
Severe pandemic S10	EHealth	Load	1% · 3%	−0.69	−1.01	Latin America and Caribbean −0.75	165 nations lose a domain band
Debt service reset S11 ↗	AEconomic and trade	Capture	1% · 3%	−0.3	−15.6	China −9.6	15 gainers · 176 mixed · 6 losers
Market access opening S12 ↗	AEconomic and trade	Capture	4% · 15%	−7.5	−43.4	Africa −16.3	35 gainers · 82 mixed · 80 losers
Great-power détente S13 ↗	BGeopolitical and security	Capture	0% · 3%	−10.6	−43.0	Russia and Eurasia −21.5	25 gainers · 70 mixed · 102 losers
Middle East settlement S14 ↗	BGeopolitical and security	Capture	1% · 3%	+3.6	−52.2	Russia and Eurasia −14.5	65 gainers · 98 mixed · 34 losers
Clean power threshold S15 ↗	CEnergy, climate and resources	Capture	4% · 15%	+6.7	−80.0	Gulf and Middle East −14.8	80 gainers · 72 mixed · 45 losers
Water-efficient food leap S16 ↗	CEnergy, climate and resources	Capture	4% · 15%	+0.5	−37.4	Russia and Eurasia −20.4	37 gainers · 109 mixed · 51 losers
Automated discovery step S17 ↗	DTechnology and infrastructure	Capture	4% · 15%	−20.5	−47.5	Africa −28.6	32 gainers · 34 mixed · 131 losers
Public service leap S18 ↗	DTechnology and infrastructure	Capture	1% · 3% per nation	−5.0	−29.1	Russia and Eurasia −14.0	30 gainers · 98 mixed · 69 losers
Chronic disease advance S19 ↗	EHealth	Capture	4% · 15%	−4.2	−39.2	Latin America and Caribbean −8.5	49 gainers · 76 mixed · 72 losers
Outbreak defence succeeds S20 ↗	EHealth	Capture	1% · 3%	+7.6	−20.0	Africa −3.9	92 gainers · 92 mixed · 13 losers

Load test figures are changes in the capability index, in points on its 0 to 20 scale, under current plans. Capture test figures are net positions on a scale of −100 to +100.

Reverse stress test

The tests above start from a scenario. This one starts from an outcome and works backwards to the conditions most likely to produce it, over 10 years. Shown here are the six most likely failure outcomes and the six most likely prosperity outcomes, of 50. All outcomes and how to read them.

Outcome	Kind	Nations with a route	Typical likelihood	Leads most routes
Breakdown of state function	Failure	188 of 197	2.5%	Legitimacy rupture 80 nations
Loss of financial stability	Failure	181 of 197	1.8%	Global funding seizure 78 nations
Broad fall in governance and integrity	Failure	185 of 197	1.3%	Legitimacy rupture 89 nations
Broad fall in financial strength	Failure	178 of 197	1.1%	Global funding seizure 92 nations
Rupture in trade and supply	Failure	178 of 197	0.8%	Regional war spillover 134 nations
Rule of law failure	Failure	181 of 197	0.7%	Legitimacy rupture 93 nations
Capable digital government	Prosperity	88 of 197	none	Outbreak defence succeeds 33 nations
Stronger health and biotechnology	Prosperity	85 of 197	none	Outbreak defence succeeds 48 nations
Trusted public institutions	Prosperity	85 of 197	none	Outbreak defence succeeds 29 nations
Broad rise in governance and integrity	Prosperity	80 of 197	none	Outbreak defence succeeds 43 nations
Reliable low-cost energy	Prosperity	76 of 197	none	Clean power threshold 60 nations
Broad rise in trade and investment	Prosperity	70 of 197	none	Market access opening 30 nations

Every nation, every scenario

Nations in order of their baseline capability index. Darker cells are larger falls; purple cells are net gains in the upside scenarios. Select a nation or a scenario for its page.

Find a nation

Region

197 of 197 nations

Nation	Index	01 S01 Critical trade divides into rival blocs: change in index	02 S02 A global funding seizure reaches sovereign balance sheets: change in index	03 S03 A regional war closes a globally important sea route: change in index	04 S04 Hybrid coercion ends in an infrastructure blackout: change in index	05 S05 A disputed transfer of power breaks effective government: change in index	06 S06 Two breadbasket failures trigger a food availability crisis: change in index	07 S07 A major disaster disables the national economic core: change in index	08 S08 An AI deployment step causes abrupt labour displacement: change in index	09 S09 A cryptographic breakthrough invalidates digital trust: change in index	10 S10 A novel respiratory pathogen exceeds health surge capacity: change in index	11↗ S11 A creditor agreement releases fiscal capacity: net position	12↗ S12 A cross-regional market access compact redirects investment: net position	13↗ S13 A great-power agreement lowers economic security barriers: net position	14↗ S14 A verified Middle East settlement restores access: net position	15↗ S15 Cheap firm clean power becomes available at scale: net position	16↗ S16 A validated farming package raises water-efficient output: net position	17↗ S17 AI-directed research produces a reproducible discovery step: net position	18↗ S18 A public service platform reaches inclusive operation: net position	19↗ S19 Affordable preventive treatments reduce chronic illness: net position	20↗ S20 A live outbreak proves rapid distributed pandemic defence: net position
United States	18.0	−0.18	−0.30	−0.16	−0.19	−0.21	−0.20	−0.51	−0.46	−0.37	−0.38	+0	+15	+27	+11	+16	+4	+87	+14	+59	+52
France	16.6	−0.27	−0.36	−0.48	−0.29	−0.24	−0.24	−0.41	−0.50	−0.43	−0.46	+3	+26	+26	+42	+59	+10	+60	+18	+44	+65
United Kingdom	16.5	−0.48	−0.43	−0.43	−0.26	−0.24	−0.19	−0.12	−0.52	−0.44	−0.43	+6	+36	+52	+36	+41	+3	+60	+17	+54	+62
Germany	16.4	−0.32	−0.34	−0.55	−0.34	−0.19	−0.25	−0.22	−0.47	−0.45	−0.47	+1	+23	+33	+42	+67	+15	+64	+15	+51	+66
Japan	16.3	−0.33	−0.24	−0.48	−0.34	−0.21	−0.16	−0.46	−0.49	−0.44	−0.46	+2	+23	+35	+36	+63	+24	+66	+22	+30	+63
South Korea	16.0	−0.48	−0.26	−0.57	−0.35	−0.21	−0.23	−0.50	−0.46	−0.45	−0.49	+3	+31	+50	+35	+61	+26	+68	+22	+28	+64
China	15.6	−0.31	−0.25	−0.35	−0.08	−0.27	−0.29	−0.58	−0.50	−0.43	−0.41	−10	+4	+36	+30	+53	+28	+57	−1	+18	+38
Netherlands	15.5	−0.39	−0.40	−0.57	−0.39	−0.21	−0.24	−0.28	−0.51	−0.47	−0.57	−1	+32	+35	+34	+49	+9	+59	+15	+45	+68
Sweden	15.3	−0.39	−0.33	−0.61	−0.37	−0.25	−0.23	−0.18	−0.48	−0.48	−0.54	−1	+31	+26	+38	+53	+4	+48	+18	+47	+65
Singapore	15.2	−0.45	−0.31	−0.71	−0.41	−0.23	−0.24	−0.29	−0.45	−0.48	−0.56	−1	+37	+49	+29	+46	+22	+61	+12	+32	+70
Canada	15.1	−0.47	−0.35	−0.26	−0.28	−0.23	−0.20	−0.29	−0.51	−0.49	−0.51	+2	+13	+35	−0	+2	−5	+54	+14	+56	+52
Australia	14.9	−0.40	−0.27	−0.22	−0.36	−0.22	−0.21	−0.42	−0.53	−0.49	−0.46	+4	+21	+14	+8	+4	+4	+33	+24	+53	+54
Switzerland	14.7	−0.41	−0.23	−0.83	−0.43	−0.19	−0.17	−0.23	−0.50	−0.51	−0.53	−3	+30	+31	+32	+48	+6	+52	+13	+42	+59
Norway	14.6	−0.36	−0.26	−0.28	−0.50	−0.21	−0.15	−0.22	−0.50	−0.54	−0.54	−3	+14	+14	+10	+9	−1	+31	+13	+41	+54
Finland	14.5	−0.38	−0.39	−0.61	−0.49	−0.22	−0.24	−0.18	−0.49	−0.47	−0.55	+1	+22	+20	+36	+50	+4	+41	+19	+43	+58
Israel	14.5	−0.36	−0.24	−0.40	−0.28	−0.37	−0.36	−0.38	−0.47	−0.47	−0.44	−1	+21	+20	+42	+9	+28	+56	+19	+46	+42
Taiwan	14.0	−0.62	−0.28	−0.75	−0.43	−0.27	−0.31	−0.50	−0.63	−0.58	−0.60	+3	+30	+25	+25	+58	+27	+51	+23	+39	+58
Denmark	13.9	−0.48	−0.32	−0.52	−0.46	−0.20	−0.27	−0.24	−0.51	−0.57	−0.58	−4	+22	+20	+24	+34	+13	+32	+13	+43	+60
Spain	13.8	−0.34	−0.47	−0.59	−0.40	−0.32	−0.30	−0.37	−0.63	−0.59	−0.57	+2	+12	+9	+34	+51	+9	+33	+11	+32	+53
Italy	13.7	−0.36	−0.45	−0.59	−0.40	−0.31	−0.27	−0.46	−0.64	−0.58	−0.58	−1	+8	+14	+31	+49	+7	+39	+9	+17	+50
Belgium	13.5	−0.45	−0.51	−0.77	−0.48	−0.29	−0.33	−0.28	−0.61	−0.61	−0.67	−1	+30	+26	+30	+42	+10	+44	+14	+36	+58
New Zealand	12.8	−0.44	−0.27	−0.50	−0.44	−0.25	−0.20	−0.42	−0.60	−0.63	−0.55	+3	+20	+6	+25	+29	+9	+17	+20	+38	+44
Austria	12.8	−0.45	−0.48	−0.80	−0.48	−0.26	−0.29	−0.29	−0.57	−0.60	−0.59	−2	+19	+22	+28	+46	+4	+40	+10	+32	+47
India	12.6	−0.32	−0.32	−0.50	−0.25	−0.60	−0.40	−0.62	−0.72	−0.41	−0.43	+8	+16	−1	+23	+31	+29	+9	+23	+10	+24
Poland	12.4	−0.47	−0.41	−0.68	−0.52	−0.32	−0.30	−0.28	−0.62	−0.60	−0.63	−3	+8	+10	+37	+48	+7	+19	+10	+20	+44

Showing 1–25 of 197 nations · page 1 of 8

Smaller to larger fallSmaller to larger net gain

Columns are scenario numbers: 01 Trade bloc rupture · 02 Global funding seizure · 03 Regional war spillover · 04 Hybrid coercion · 05 Legitimacy rupture · 06 Breadbasket failure · 07 Core disaster · 08 AI labour shock · 09 Cryptographic trust break · 10 Severe pandemic · 11 Debt service reset · 12 Market access opening · 13 Great-power détente · 14 Middle East settlement · 15 Clean power threshold · 16 Water-efficient food leap · 17 Automated discovery step · 18 Public service leap · 19 Chronic disease advance · 20 Outbreak defence succeeds. Select a column heading to sort. Download all results as CSV.