TOP 100 Countries by Road Quality Index (2025)

The Road Quality Index (QRI) used here is the World Economic Forum (WEF) “Quality of road infrastructure” indicator. It is perception-based, built from a standardized question asked to business executives in the Executive Opinion Survey. The key advantage is comparability: the same question, same scale, and a long time series (2006–2019) allow meaningful cross-country ranking. The key limitation is also clear: it captures experienced quality as seen by firms, not a direct engineering audit of pavement condition, lane-km, or bridge ratings.

In practice, a country can score well because it maintains a high-performing strategic network (freight corridors, urban motorways, and connectors to ports/airports), even if some secondary or rural roads are weaker. Conversely, a country can invest heavily in new construction yet still score modestly if maintenance funding is unstable, governance is fragmented, or congestion and work-zone disruption dominate how users perceive “quality.” That is why QRI is best read as a “user-experience plus system performance” signal rather than a pure capital-spending scoreboard.

Why label this as a 2025 ranking if the underlying comparable year is 2019? Because the global survey-based series ends in 2019 for many countries in a consistent form, while newer infrastructure datasets often change definitions or focus on different concepts (access, travel times, or logistics outcomes). A “2025 snapshot” framing is useful for readers who need a stable, comparable baseline for cross-country analysis and decision-making, while keeping the underlying reference year explicit and transparent.

Tip for interpretation: a one-point difference on a 1–7 scale is large. The spread from 6.5 (rank 1) to 5.7 (rank 10) is 0.8 points, while the gap between the global average (4.07) and the top performers is more than two points.

The top 20 contains a clear cluster of high-capacity, high-maintenance networks. It also illustrates a pattern that shows up across many infrastructure indicators: strong performers tend to have stable funding for lifecycle maintenance, consistent national standards, and governance that reduces project delays and “unfinished” work zones.

Indicator and scale. The Road Quality Index (QRI) in this article refers to the World Economic Forum’s “Quality of road infrastructure” measure from the Global Competitiveness framework. Executives participating in the WEF Executive Opinion Survey rate road infrastructure in the country where they operate on a seven-point scale: 1 indicates an underdeveloped road network, and 7 indicates an extensive and efficient network by international standards. Individual responses are aggregated into a country score that can be compared across economies in the same survey year.

Reference year used for the 2025 snapshot. The most widely used, globally comparable cross-country “quality of roads” series ends in 2019 for many economies in a consistent form. Rather than mixing different definitions from newer datasets, this ranking keeps one stable yardstick and labels it as a 2025 snapshot while explicitly stating the underlying comparable year (2019). This approach is common in global ranking work when the newest year is not yet available for all economies under a consistent methodology.

Data handling. Scores are reported in points as published, rounded to one decimal place. The “gap vs global average” uses the global mean of 4.07 points for 2019. This gap is included to help readers interpret magnitude: a country at 5.3 is +1.23 points above the global average, while a country at 3.5 is −0.57 points below it.

What QRI is good for. QRI is particularly useful when you need a cross-country comparator for business experience: the measure is aligned with what firms notice day-to-day—reliability, corridor consistency, and operational quality. For strategic decisions (site selection, distribution design, market entry), a stable comparator can be more valuable than a narrowly technical metric that lacks global coverage.

Limitations and how to use it responsibly. QRI is survey-based and can be influenced by the sector mix of respondents, congestion experience in major cities, and the visibility of flagship corridors. It does not replace engineering measures such as pavement roughness, bridge structural condition, or rural accessibility. For a full infrastructure view, combine QRI with outcome-based measures such as travel-time reliability, logistics performance, road safety indicators, and maintenance backlogs.

1) Maintenance beats ribbon-cutting. The top of the ranking is dominated by places where maintenance is treated as a core service, not an afterthought. A new highway can boost capacity, but if resurfacing cycles slip and small defects compound, the user experience deteriorates quickly. High performers tend to run disciplined lifecycle programs: preventative maintenance, fast repairs, and predictable rehabilitation schedules.

2) Reliability is the hidden dimension of “quality.” Businesses care about mean travel time, but they often care even more about variance. When delivery windows are uncertain, companies pay twice: they add buffer time and hold higher inventory. Countries that manage incidents well, enforce work-zone discipline, and keep corridor standards consistent can create a “quality” perception that is bigger than asphalt smoothness alone.

3) Smaller, dense economies can concentrate quality. Several top scorers are compact, highly urbanized, and trade-connected. When networks are shorter, governments can standardize operations and fund high-quality corridors more easily. That does not mean large countries cannot score high; it means scale introduces more coordination and maintenance complexity, and the weakest links become more visible to users.

4) The distribution shows a steep drop after the top tier. In the 2019 global series, the average sits at 4.07 points, while the leaders reach 6.5. That is a substantial distance on a 1–7 scale. For readers, this gap is a reminder that “good roads” is not a universal baseline; in many markets, road quality materially changes logistics costs, commute patterns, vehicle durability, and even the feasibility of certain business models.

If you are comparing countries for work, relocation, travel, or investment research, road quality affects everyday life in surprisingly direct ways. A higher QRI is often associated with lower commute uncertainty, fewer vehicle repairs from rough surfaces, and better connectivity between residential areas, job centers, ports, and airports. For entrepreneurs, it can shape the cost structure of delivery-heavy businesses: e-commerce, field services, fresh food distribution, and regional manufacturing supply chains.

For firms entering a new market, treat QRI as an early-stage filter. A low score does not automatically rule out opportunity, but it signals that you should stress-test assumptions: buffer inventory, plan for longer lead times, audit last-mile constraints, and consider where to place warehouses relative to customers. When QRI is high, the upside is not only faster transport—it is tighter planning, better schedule predictability, and lower “hidden logistics tax.”

Finally, remember that “road quality” is not identical to “road safety.” Some high-capacity networks can still have safety challenges, and some countries improve safety through enforcement even with modest infrastructure. Use QRI alongside road safety indicators when your decision depends on risk, insurance costs, or duty-of-care requirements.