This is interesting, I like the minimalistic aesthetics, and the final ranking looks broadly meaningful. But it think it misses some important metrics like GDP per capita, scientific research output, social mobility, and life expectancy. I am kinda of skeptical about the value of Olympic medals per GDP.

One interesting thing this made me notice is how high the net immigration for Lebanon is. That is quite peculiar, as I remember reading in the news that they have serious chronic problems with keeping the lights on.

I am also curious to know how the overall ranking is determined based on all these measures. It would be fun if you could "personalize" it a little bit to find your favorite countries. (e.g. If you like a particular sport, maybe the Olympic medals for that sport would be more exciting to you. Or if you are a non-conformist, maybe the Noridc countries won't be as attractive due to the Law of Jante [2], etc.)

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante

> GDP per capita, scientific research output, social mobility, and life expectancy

These are already incorporated as a part of multiple studies like Good Country index, or Human Freedom index. Having them again would increase their weight. I had many more studies/factors but then narrowed them down to those that have Pearson correlation less than 0.8.

> I am kinda of skeptical about the value of Olympic medals per GDP.

My goal was to have as many uncorrelated factors as possible, that make sense. Medals per GDP, means a country investing in sports or generally in good health.

The idea that the sole global superpower would be 59th is absolutely silly, no matter the metrics used.

Strongest != Greatest

This is why the study uses 16 factors, not just one.

Needs an explanation of its algorithm, and the ability to set your own weightings.

How does Belgium have the (third) best wealth inequality in the world, and the neithbouring Netherlands the absolute worst wealth inequality?