03 Jun 2016
View this page in: Magyar
PwC study seeks to benchmark Olympic medals tally
With the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro fast approaching, speculation turns once again to how many medals each country will win. So PwC economists have stepped up to the starting blocks to produce some benchmarks against which performance at the 2016 Olympics can be measured.
The following economic and political factors were found to be statistically significant in explaining the number of medals won by each country at previous Olympic Games:
In general, the number of medals won increases with the population and economic wealth of the country; but there are exceptions like Jamaica and Kenya. Jamaica, for example, is projected to win 0.4 medals in Rio for every $bn of GDP, while the same ratio is only around 0.02 for the UK and Russia, and around 0.005-0.006 for the US and China.
“David can sometimes beat Goliath in the Olympic arena, although superpowers like the US and China continue to dominate the top of the medals table,” says PwC chief economist John Hawksworth.
“Our experts, who have been preparing such estimates since 2000, based their forecast model on economic and political factors. We in Hungary are more confident about the number of Hungarian medals, and expect to rank higher than 18th place in the medal table,” added Zoltán Katona, Senior Manager at PwC Hungary’s Advisory practice.
In the extract below, our model estimates the top 12 medal-winning countries in Rio compared to London 2012 – for the full table of 30 countries see later in the release.
Country |
Model estimate of medal total in Rio 2016 |
Medal total in London 2012 |
Difference |
1. US |
108 |
103 |
+5 |
2. China |
98 |
88 |
+10 |
3. Russia |
70 |
81 |
-11 |
4. Great Britain |
52 |
65 |
-13 |
5. Germany |
40 |
44 |
-4 |
6. Australia |
35 |
35 |
0 |
7. France |
34 |
34 |
0 |
8. Japan |
33 |
38 |
-5 |
9. South Korea |
27 |
28 |
-1 |
10. Italy |
26 |
28 |
-2 |
11. Brazil |
25 |
17 |
+8 |
12. Ukraine |
20 |
20 |
0 |
Past Olympic performance is important, reflecting the stronger sporting traditions in some countries, and the level of government funding for Olympic sports. Adds John Hawksworth: “We can see this effect at work in China recently, where state support contributed greatly to their Olympic success in Beijing and London.”
Some of the more interesting conclusions to be drawn from the PwC model are:
Country |
Model estimate of medal total in Rio 2016 |
Medal total in London 2012 |
Difference |
1. USA |
108 |
103 |
+5 |
2. China |
98 |
88 |
+10 |
3. Russia |
701 |
81 |
-11 |
4. Great Britain |
52 |
65 |
-13 |
5. Germany |
40 |
44 |
-4 |
6. Australia |
35 |
35 |
0 |
7. France |
34 |
34 |
0 |
8. Japan |
33 |
38 |
-5 |
9. South Korea |
27 |
28 |
-1 |
10. Italy |
26 |
28 |
-2 |
11. Brazil |
25 |
17 |
+8 |
12. Ukraine |
20 |
20 |
0 |
13. Canada |
17 |
18 |
-1 |
14. Netherlands |
17 |
20 |
-3 |
15. Spain |
17 |
17 |
0 |
16. Cuba |
16 |
15 |
+1 |
17. Belarus |
13 |
12 |
+1 |
18. Hungary |
13 |
18 |
-5 |
19. India |
12 |
6 |
+6 |
20. Kazakhstan |
12 |
13 |
-1 |
21. Kenya |
11 |
11 |
0 |
22. Jamaica |
10 |
12 |
-2 |
23. New Zealand |
10 |
13 |
-3 |
24. Poland |
10 |
10 |
0 |
25. Iran |
8 |
12 |
-4 |
26. Romania |
8 |
9 |
-1 |
27. Azerbaijan |
8 |
10 |
-2 |
28. Czech Republic |
8 |
10 |
-2 |
29. Denmark |
7 |
9 |
-2 |
30. Turkey |
7 |
5 |
+2 |
Top 30 total medals |
771 |
801 |
-30 |
Other countries |
190 |
160 |
+30 |
Total medals |
961 |
961 |
0 |
Note: the table shows rounded medal estimates from the model, but the country rankings reflect unrounded model estimates.
Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers model estimates using data for actual medals won in London 2012 that takes accounts of medals reallocated after the Games (e.g. due to drug use violations) where a firm decision has been made on this by the Olympic authorities as of late May 2016. For the sake of comparability, we assume the same total number of medals are awarded in Rio as in in London.