CURRENT ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
2016 EPI score
F (Very Poor) |
D (Poor) |
C (Fair) |
B (Good) |
A (Excellent) |
A+ (Superior) |
<60 | 60-80 | 80-90 | 90-95 | 95-100 | >100 |
Hungary: strong growth
The Hungarian economy is growing at a strong pace supported by loose monetary policies and improved market sentiment, despite weak economic activity in the euro area. The EPI grades Hungary’s current economic performance at a solid B- level, with the EPI score projected to be close to 90.9% in 2016.
A surge in investment and private consumption boosted GDP growth to 3% in 2015 and to expected 2.5% in 2016, despite weak economic activity in the euro area. The unemployment level remains elevated at 7% and the government is providing some fiscal stimulus, with the projected budget deficit of 2.3% in 2016. Inflation remains at zero, driven by low commodity prices and disinflationary environment in Europe.
The 5-Minute Economist projects Hungary’s EPI score to decline slightly in the medium term from almost 91% currently to 91.4% by 2020 but still stay at the solid B level, mainly driven by a gradual pick-up in inflation. GDP growth is likely to slow down as well, as the government fiscal support would be gradually decreased as well the level of the budget deficit.
ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE HISTORY
EPI COMPONENTS PERFORMANCE HISTORY
Inflation
Unemployment
Budget deficit
GDP Growth
EPI DATA FOR HUNGARY
Year | Inflation Rate (%) | Unemployment Rate (%) | Budget Deficit as a Percent of GDP (%) | Change in Real GDP (%) | Raw EPI Score (%) | Change From Previous Year | Raw EPI performance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 9.8 | 6 | 3.0 | 4.2 | 85.4 | 3.8 | C |
2001 | 9.2 | 5.6 | 4.1 | 3.8 | 85.0 | -0.4 | C |
2002 | 5.3 | 5.9 | 8.8 | 4.5 | 84.5 | -0.5 | C |
2003 | 4.7 | 5.5 | 7.1 | 3.8 | 86.5 | 2.0 | C |
2004 | 6.7 | 6.3 | 6.4 | 5.0 | 85.6 | -0.9 | C |
2005 | 3.6 | 7.2 | 7.8 | 4.4 | 85.8 | 0.2 | C |
2006 | 3.9 | 7.5 | 9.3 | 3.9 | 83.1 | -2.7 | C |
2007 | 8.0 | 7.4 | 5.1 | 0.4 | 80.0 | -3.1 | D+ |
2008 | 6.0 | 7.9 | 3.6 | 0.9 | 83.3 | 3.3 | C |
2009 | 4.2 | 10.1 | 4.6 | -6.6 | 74.6 | -8.8 | D |
2010 | 4.9 | 11.3 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 80.0 | 5.5 | D+ |
2011 | 3.9 | 11.1 | 5.5 | 1.7 | 81.2 | 1.2 | C- |
2012 | 5.7 | 11.1 | 2.3 | -1.6 | 79.3 | -1.9 | D+ |
2013 | 1.7 | 10.2 | 2.5 | 2.1 | 87.7 | 8.3 | C |
2014 | -0.2 | 7.8 | 2.3 | 4.0 | 93.8 | 6.1 | B |
2015 | -0.1 | 6.8 | 2.0 | 3.1 | 94.2 | 0.5 | B+ |
2016 | 0.4 | 4.9 | 1.8 | 2 | 94.9 | 0.7 | B+ |
2017* | 2.5 | 4.4 | 2.6 | 2.9 | 93.4 | -1.6 | B |
2018* | 3.3 | 4.3 | 2.5 | 3 | 92.8 | -0.5 | B |
2019* | 3.0 | 4.3 | 2.3 | 2.6 | 93.0 | 0.2 | B |
2020* | 3.0 | 4.2 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 92.9 | 0.0 | B |
2021* | 3.0 | 4.1 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 92.6 | -0.4 | B |
2022* | 3.0 | 4.0 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 92.6 | 0.0 | B |