Trade Corridor and Supply-Chain Integration
69.6%
Large combined demand and logistics compatibility improve bilateral trade surplus potential.
China
61.3%
Sweden
77.8%
Shared gain
48.9%
China vs Sweden
Overall Mutual Score: 53.9%
Overall Fit Rank53.9%
Trade Pull17.2%
Mutual Win Potential48.9%
Risk Drag9.7%
China profile
Market Size99.1%
Resource Strength22.6%
Tech Readiness96.0%
Human Capital93.5%
Infrastructure68.6%
Energy Position15.2%
Climate Pressure55.9%
Governance49.5%
Sweden profile
Market Size82.0%
Resource Strength14.5%
Tech Readiness97.8%
Human Capital64.5%
Infrastructure100.0%
Energy Position57.9%
Climate Pressure21.4%
Governance86.3%
What These Countries Should Do Together
Top joint action plans ranked by expected shared benefit.
Skills Mobility and Human Capital Partnership
53.9%
Labor-market complementarity and digital readiness increase long-run productivity in both economies.
China
45.0%
Sweden
62.8%
Shared gain
32.7%
Food-Water-Climate Resilience Pact
23.7%
Climate asymmetry and natural-capital differences hedge systemic shocks for both countries.
China
20.8%
Sweden
26.5%
Shared gain
2.3%
Technology Transfer and Joint R&D
17.2%
Capability gaps plus adequate skills make co-development and diffusion efficient.
China
17.9%
Sweden
16.6%
Shared gain
0.0%
Critical Resource and Energy Exchange
12.9%
Asymmetric resource endowments and energy profiles support mutually beneficial contracts.
China
16.9%
Sweden
8.8%
Shared gain
0.0%