Did European countries spending more on sports perform better at the Olympics?

Which European country performed best at the Paris Olympics? The answer might not be so straightforward.

First of all, it depends on how you count the medals — whether by total count, golds, or using a weighted point system.

Also, each country's socio-economic and demographic characteristics vary significantly, making comparisons challenging.

To provide a more nuanced analysis, Euronews examined the employment rate in sports and government expenditure to evaluate European countries' Olympic performance in the Paris Summer Games.

There is no formal medal-counting system to compare countries in the Olympics.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) does not explicitly endorse any particular method. However, the current ranking on the official website is based on the number of gold medals.

Media outlets, researchers, and experts suggest various weighted point systems to count the medals and rank the countries.

A weighted point system takes into account the relative value of medals, with gold being worth more than silver, and silver more than bronze. For example, in a "3:2:1" system, three points are awarded for a gold medal, two points for a silver, and one point for a bronze.

However, the value assigned to a gold medal can vary. For instance, according to Yaroslav Sergeyev’s article, in 2008, The New York Times used a “4:2:1” system. In 1908, the British press applied a “5:3:1” weighting.

More recently, Topend Sports suggested a “6:2:1” model. Ultimately, the choice of weighting system is subjective and can influence the ranking outcome.

Looking at the number of medals, France led the rankings across all counting systems in broader Europe, which includes the EU, EFTA, the UK, and EU candidate countries.

The significant