Philippines → China
This score represents Philippines's relationship toward China. 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 official record does not establish a frozen bilateral security rule or mutual-defence obligation.
2 documented factors produce the 0 diplomacy assessment.
Why this score?
- +10Recurring institutional dialogueBaseline rule · 2015
The official bilateral record supports the frozen recurring institutional dialogue criterion for China and the Philippines in 2015.
- -10South China Sea arbitration clarifies the legal disputeActive event · 2016
The arbitral award rejected central elements of China's maritime claims, entrenching the bilateral dispute while providing a legal reference point.
3 documented factors produce the +50 economic assessment.
Why this score?
- +15Institutional economic cooperationBaseline rule · 2015
The official bilateral record supports the frozen institutional economic cooperation criterion for China and the Philippines in 2015.
- +20Bilateral trade thresholdBaseline rule · 2015
Reported trade activates the absolute methodology route using the latest observation available for this year.
- +15Annual 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.
2 documented factors produce the +25 alignment assessment.
Why this score?
- +10Sustained multilateral cooperationBaseline rule · 2015
The official bilateral record supports the frozen sustained multilateral cooperation criterion for China and the Philippines in 2015.
- +15United Nations voting alignmentBaseline rule · 2015
A rolling three-year comparison of UN General Assembly votes activates the alignment threshold.
3 documented factors produce the -100 disputes assessment.
Why this score?
- -50Unresolved territorial or maritime disputeBaseline rule · 2015
The official bilateral record supports the frozen unresolved territorial or maritime dispute criterion for China and the Philippines in 2015.
- -40Coercive conduct in a maritime disputeBaseline rule · 2015
The official bilateral record supports the frozen coercive conduct in a maritime dispute criterion for China and the Philippines in 2015.
- -15South China Sea arbitration clarifies the legal disputeActive event · 2016
The arbitral award rejected central elements of China's maritime claims, entrenching the bilateral dispute while providing a legal reference point.
The displayed value is limited to the model’s −100 to +100 component range.
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 national-scale people-to-people exchange meeting the frozen societal threshold.
-2 in 2015 → -3 in 2026
The change is generated from sourced events and frozen scoring rules, not retrospective editorial adjustment.
0 points
Philippines → China and China → Philippines remain independent assessments.
View the reverse direction →ACTIVE EVIDENCE
Events affecting the current score
South China Sea arbitration clarifies the legal dispute
The arbitral award rejected central elements of China's maritime claims, entrenching the bilateral dispute while providing a legal reference point.
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 →