How does your leader really rank?
Every national leader, scored across nine dimensions of power — from economy and diplomacy to crisis management and defense. Compare current form against the legacy they'll leave behind, and see who's really delivering.
No data
No expert-survey data available.
The story
Masoud Pezeshkian, President of Iran, is rated 42 (lower tier) on NationsHelm's Leadership scale. Their standout dimension is Diplomacy (76/100). In global media, their Communication signal reads 11/100 (high confidence), tracked from GDELT. The pressure to watch: Economic Pressure — Economy score of 40 indicates ongoing challenges with macroeconomic management in Iran.
Downloadable NationsHelm cards for each signal in this dossier.
International relations and multilateral negotiation
Public communication, oratory, and media presence
Perceived transparency and anti-corruption track record
Favourability of media coverage over the tenure (GDELT tenure-mean tone), cross-leader percentile
Media volume (GDELT tenure-median daily coverage) percentile, gated down when coverage is hostile
Does tone / approval hold up when attention spikes vs. calmer periods (derived)
Stack this leader against any other in the NationsHelm database.
Masoud Pezeshkian is the President of Iran, from the Front of Islamic Revolution Stability.
Masoud Pezeshkian holds a Leadership Rating of 42 out of 100 (weak). It is a derived blend of sourced leadership dimensions — governance, communication, diplomacy and others — never an estimate.
Masoud Pezeshkian's strongest leadership dimension is Diplomacy (76/100); the weakest is Communication (11/100), ranked from the leadership radar.
The main pressures are economic pressure and governance accountability. Economy score of 40 indicates ongoing challenges with macroeconomic management in Iran.
Masoud Pezeshkian profiles as a Strongman — Power is centralized; stability derives from the leader's personal authority rather than institutional checks.
Masoud Pezeshkian has a Communication signal of 11/100 from GDELT media coverage and a Diplomatic Signal of 82/100 from GDELT events.
State management and policy execution capacity
Political coalition-building and governability
Economic stewardship, growth, and macro stability
Cited, adversarially-verified forward analysis — every claim is sourced and survived a red-team. An LLM intelligence brief, not a sourced score, and never blended into this leader's ratings.
Iran accidentally made its president matter more: with an unseen, incapacitated Supreme Leader unable to arbitrate war and peace, it was Pezeshkian's resignation threat — not a fatwa — that forced Tehran to sign the deal ending the 2026 war. His ceiling is Rouhani's, not Khatami's — he will co-author the exit from a war and deliver no reform at home.
The July 2026 consensus: Pezeshkian is a powerless figurehead — a reformist president reduced to a diplomatic mouthpiece for an IRGC-dominated regime, presiding over economic collapse (IMF: -6.1% GDP, 68.9% inflation) and a populace brutalized in the December-January crackdown, with real power having shifted decisively to the Revolutionary Guard after Ali Khamenei's assassination and his son Mojtaba's disputed, invisible succession.
Pezeshkian survives the crisis in office — he is not impeached, forced to resign, or removed before 2026-12-31, despite economic collapse and hardline attacks, because the pragmatist-security bloc needs a civilian legitimacy-face to own the US deal it signed.
Strongest counter — Economic catastrophe could make Pezeshkian the scapegoat, and the IRGC has restricted presidential powers before. Survives: removing the deal's own signatory mid-negotiation, inside the 60-day window, would collapse the MoU the security elite chose to sign — and when a hardline MP attacked him in June, mainstream conservatives (Javan's Ganji, Salimi Namin) publicly defended him as necessary for systemic function. The near-term structural incentive to keep him is strong.
Wrong if — Pezeshkian is impeached, resigns, or is removed from the presidency before 2026-12-31.
Country scores are blended with live World Bank data where available. Difficulty reflects the structural challenge of governing this nation — not the leader's individual performance.
Power is centralized; stability derives from the leader's personal authority rather than institutional checks. Defense and politics scores are typically high; institutional integrity tends to be a secondary concern.
Also reads as
Foreign policy and international positioning define this leadership style. High diplomacy scores — often paired with strong governance fundamentals — suggest a leader who builds national power through multilateral engagement.
Low exposure
Untested
Worst year (2025) — shock drivers
Each is a global percentile: how this year's shock compares to every country-year on record. Disaster shocks are not yet sourced (no open-licensed annual series).
Sourced from 3 mandate-years (2024–2026), 3 of 4 shock components present.
International diplomatic events the country takes part in (GDELT Events) — country-level
Share of international interactions coded cooperative vs conflictual — country-level
Favourability of foreign coverage of the leader on diplomacy — leader-level
Distinct foreign source countries covering the leader on diplomacy — leader-level
Partial coverage: 70% of the formula's weight is currently sourced; the score renormalises over what's present. Remaining components appear as data lands.
Reach is discounted to 0% of its raw percentile because tenure-mean coverage tone skews unfavourable — hostile attention isn't credited as positive reach.
Economy score of 40 indicates ongoing challenges with macroeconomic management in Iran.
Institutional Integrity score of 27 reflects persistent accountability pressures that constrain institutional effectiveness.
Communication score of 11 — the leadership barely registers in the public arena, limiting its ability to build support or steer the narrative.
Stability score of 42 indicates the system's performance is heavily dependent on this leader — a concentration risk.
Low political violence · High factional pressure · Contested legitimacy
Neutral external backdrop.
WGI Political Stability & Absence of Violence
WGI Rule of Law, Government Effectiveness & Control of Corruption
V-Dem political continuity and regime legitimacy
UCDP organized-violence deaths, population-scaled and inverted — prefers the fresh current-year UCDP-CED reading, else the finalized annual GED
Fragile States Index social-cohesion pillar
3-year direction of the WGI stability score
Consensus is short Pezeshkian's relevance and long the deal's durability — both mispriced. The vacuum that pundits read as his irrelevance is exactly what buys his near-term job security and diplomatic ownership: a collective-rule regime mid-negotiation cannot afford to fire the civilian who signed its exit ramp. Meanwhile the crowd treats the Islamabad Memorandum as a settlement when it is a 60-day truce with the hardest questions (enrichment, inspections, Hormuz tolls) untouched and a dissenting Supreme Leader. Trade: long 'Pezeshkian survives and owns the diplomatic file through 2026,' short 'comprehensive nuclear deal inside the 60-day window.'
Cited · adversarially red-teamed · updated 2026-07-08
