Every national leader, scored across up to eight dimensions of tenure contribution — from governance and economy to politics and crisis response. Compare current form against the legacy they'll leave behind.
Raimundo Pereira is a former President of Guinea-Bissau, from the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde.
How is Raimundo Pereira rated on NationsHelm?
Raimundo Pereira holds a weak Legacy Rating of 51 out of 100. It is a derived blend of sourced leadership dimensions — governance, communication, diplomacy and others — never an estimate.
What are Raimundo Pereira's strengths and weaknesses?
Raimundo Pereira's strongest leadership dimension is Economy (82/100); the weakest is Institutional Integrity (18/100), ranked from the leadership radar.
Data coverage:107 Sourced·85 Derived|Scores refreshed: 2026-09-28·snap-20260928-e5941091|Methodology:Reconstructable|Cite:How to cite
Spot an error?
Profile
Legacy Rating50.6as of 2026-09coverage 5/8
Role
President
Party
African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde
Term
2012–2012
Country
Guinea-Bissau
Political Position
LeftLeftRight
V-Dem V-Party — economic left–right (v2pariglef, expert-coded), high confidence, party position coded 2019.
SourceTenure record + derivedMethod
A note the moment a prediction resolves — and when the record changes. Free.
Strongest on economy — sharpest weakness institutional integrity.
Briefing
The story
Raimundo Pereira served as President of Guinea-Bissau. Raimundo Pereira holds a weak Legacy Rating of 51 out of 100. Their standout dimension is Economy (82/100).
The data & sources
The Legacy Rating of 51 is a derived blend of Raimundo Pereira's leadership dimensions, each computed from sourced public inputs — none estimated. Diplomatic Conduct — no country-level data; shown as "No data" rather than inferred. Governing-stability conditions score 34/100, renormalised over WGI, V-Dem and UCDP.
The risk read
For country-risk purposes, Raimundo Pereira's tenure reads as fragile: governing-stability conditions score 34/100. Crisis exposure 86/100 (Extreme exposure); response 40/100 (Fared worse than comparable crises). For the full opportunity, market-pulse and resilience read, see Guinea-Bissau's nation page.
The strategic read
Governing conditions: stability 34/100. The sharpest institutional vulnerability is Institutional Integrity (18/100).
Crisis
Exposure
86/ 100
Extreme exposure
Response
40/ 100
Fared worse than comparable crises
Medium confidence · 1 crisis year in mandate
Worst year (2012) — shock drivers
Economic contraction83
Political-stability decline95
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 1 mandate-year (2012–2012), 2 of 4 shock components present; damage ranked against 167 comparable crises.
Leadership Radar
Tenure Contribution
Polarized profile — 64-point spread from Economy to Institutional Integrity.
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.
Source: World Bank·Method: Unweighted average·✓ Reconstructable
Leadership Archetype
No distinct archetype
Polarized profile — 64-point spread from Economy to Institutional Integrity. No archetype rule matches that shape. This is a reading of the sourced stats — not a data gap.
SourceDerivedMethodRule-based classificationConfDeterministic✓ ReconstructableⓘArchetypes are derived automatically from the leadership stat profile — not hand-assigned. "No distinct archetype" means no classification rule matched; profile shape is assessed separately from the best-to-worst spread. A leader lacking enough sourced stats reads as "No data". A secondary archetype is added only when a stat scores exceptionally high.
Political Legacy
Legacy Rating
51
Assessment
ContestedDerivedDerived from the published Legacy Rating band — ≥84 Transformational · 72–83 Lasting · 60–71 Mixed · 42–59 Contested · <42 Negative.
Years Served
0
Peak Strengths
Economy82
Relative Weaknesses
Institutional Integrity18
Politics29
Governance34
Post-Office Metrics
Macro Tailwind/Headwind Adjustment
Compare this leader
Stack this leader against any other in the NationsHelm database.
One email a week — the predictions that resolved and the scores that moved on the nations and leaders you follow.
Weighted average
ConfMedium
✓ Reconstructable
ⓘLegacy Rating is the completed-tenure rating derived from sourced leadership dimensions and the recorded conditions of that tenure — on the published scale a score near 60 means the country broadly matched the benchmark trajectory over the mandate. Anything unsourced shows as no data. Full weights on the Methodology page.
Source
World Bank GDP + UCDP deaths (annual + Candidate GED) + WGI stability
ⓘCrisis Exposure measures how severely a leader was tested — a peak-biased aggregate of per-year shock severity (conflict intensity, economic contraction and political-stability decline vs. recent normal) over the mandate. It is context, not a verdict: high exposure is neither good nor bad on its own. Crisis Response measures how the country fared during its genuine crisis years relative to comparable crisis episodes worldwide — country-years hit with the same shock severity. Higher = less national damage than peers at that severity. Leaders who never faced a major shock are marked Untested rather than rewarded. Per country-year, real WB/UCDP/WGI shocks are winsorised and percentile-ranked into a ShockSeverity; Exposure is the peak-biased mandate aggregate. Crisis years (severity ≥ 60) score Response = 100 − damage percentile among comparable-severity crises worldwide, then severity-weighted over the mandate. Untested = no major shock (never rewarded). Absent components are reweighted, never filled.
Politics
29
Crisis Response
—
Vision
60
Communication
—
Institutional Integrity
18
Source: World Bank + derived·Method: Contribution·✓ ReconstructableⓘEach dimension measures change under the leader relative to global trends — how the indicator moved over their tenure, net of the world's move over the same window — not the country's absolute level. A score near 60 means performance broadly matched the benchmark trajectory; above = improved the country's standing, below = declined. Governance / Economy / Politics / Institutional Integrity from World Bank WGI, WDI and V-Dem trajectories; Vision from the country's innovation rank (WIPO patents + UNESCO tertiary), former leaders only (patents lag ~3 years); Crisis Response (World Bank + UCDP + WGI, an absolute response-quality scale) and Communication (GDELT) from tenure signals; Diplomacy (Diplomatic Conduct) is active-only. A tenure under six months, or an indicator whose series hasn't reached the term, shows as no data. Full model on the Methodology page.
Strengths & Weaknesses
Top Strengths
Economy82
Economic stewardship, growth, and macro stability
Key Weaknesses
Institutional Integrity18
Perceived transparency and anti-corruption track record
Politics29
Political coalition-building and governability
Governance34
State management and policy execution capacity
ⓘ
Country scores are the unweighted average of scored World Bank indicators — the same model used on the nation's own page. Difficulty reflects structural constraints on governing this nation, independent of the current leader.
Source: Derived·Method: Ranked by stat value·✓ ReconstructableⓘUp to 5 strengths (dimensions scoring 70+) and 5 weaknesses (scoring 57 or below), ranked from the leadership radar. Dimensions in the 58–69 benchmark band appear in neither column. Descriptions are fixed per dimension and don't vary by country. Dimensions without a sourced signal show as no data. Full model on the Methodology page.