Canada → India
This score represents Canada's relationship toward India. The reverse direction is calculated separately and shown alongside it.
SIX-COMPONENT MODEL
Current component scores
Component values run from −100 to +100 and are combined with the published weights.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: The reviewed record does not activate an additional frozen security rule for the 2015 baseline.
2 documented factors produce the +55 diplomacy assessment.
Why this score?
- +35India–Canada strategic partnershipBaseline rule · 2015
The leaders elevated bilateral relations to a strategic partnership in April 2015 with cooperation spanning security, energy, trade, education, technology and people-to-people ties.
- +20India and Canada restore leaders' engagementActive event · 2026
The 2026 joint statement restored high-level engagement and a forward work programme while not erasing the earlier crisis.
1 documented factor produce the +10 economic assessment.
Why this score?
- +10India and Canada restore leaders' engagementActive event · 2026
The 2026 joint statement restored high-level engagement and a forward work programme while not erasing the earlier crisis.
Coverage gap: Reporter-side 2015 goods trade does not reach a frozen material-trade threshold, or is unavailable.
3 documented factors produce the +10 alignment assessment.
Why this score?
- -30United Nations voting alignmentBaseline rule · 2015
A rolling three-year comparison of UN General Assembly votes activates the alignment threshold.
- +10India and Canada restore leaders' engagementActive event · 2026
The 2026 joint statement restored high-level engagement and a forward work programme while not erasing the earlier crisis.
- +30Annual methodology 1.1 recalculationAnnual recalculation · 2026
The current component replaces the 2015 quantitative threshold or time-bounded structural package with the evidence applicable in the selected year.
Coverage gap: No additional alignment gap should remain when a quantitative vote rule or documented institution covers this component.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: No qualifying frozen dispute or dispute-settlement rule is activated by the reviewed evidence.
No reviewed evidence met this component’s scoring threshold.
Why this score?
The model starts every component at zero. No documented condition or active event currently changes this one.
Coverage gap: The reviewed record does not establish the exceptional or strong exchange required by a frozen societal rule.
+3 in 2015 → +15 in 2026
The change is generated from sourced events and frozen scoring rules, not retrospective editorial adjustment.
3 points
Canada → India and India → Canada remain independent assessments.
View the reverse direction →ACTIVE EVIDENCE
Events affecting the current score
India and Canada restore leaders' engagement
The 2026 joint statement restored high-level engagement and a forward work programme while not erasing the earlier crisis.
This analytical score is not an objective fact, endorsement or prediction. Confidence reflects evidence coverage, while incomplete or unavailable observations remain explicit. Differences below 5 points are treated as practical ties rather than a meaningful ranking.
Explore the full timeline and sources in the atlas →