Eurovision 2025: Televote Results Analysis

Since 1997, the result of the Eurovision Song Contest has been decided at least in part by ‘televoting’: votes cast by the public watching at home, primarily by telephone. Initially, the scheme was trialled in five countries, before becoming the default voting system in 1998. From then until 2008, the Eurovision winner was decided entirely by televoting, before the re-introduction of national juries the following year. Televoting now counts for half of the points available at Eurovision (actually slightly more than half, but we’ll get to that in a minute).

Before the 2023 contest, a couple of changes were made to Eurovision’s voting system. The first of these was the removal of juries from the semi-finals, meaning that the qualifiers would be decided solely by televoting (with the exception of San Marino, and any other country unable to provide a valid televote result). The second change was the introduction of a ‘Rest of the World’ televote in both the semi-finals and final: a way for viewers in countries not participating in Eurovision to be involved and have a say. This vote is given the same weight as the televote of a single participating country. Both of these developments remain in place to this day.

In this article, I will look at this year’s televote winner in the context of past winning songs, then discuss the results of the televote quite broadly, before having a closer look at a few interesting points. Much of the content in the article will be quite similar to that of my analysis of the jury votes, which you can find here. I would recommend reading that first as it provides useful context for some of the points I will be raising in relation to the televote.

Since 2009, the televote winner has become the overall champion on nine out of fifteen occasions*. In every year until 2014, the people’s champion emerged victorious, and on four of these occasions, the jury agreed. However, in the years that have followed, only four televote winners have managed to win the contest outright and we have had only one unanimous verdict. This has led to a new dynamic in Eurovision recently whereby we have seen televote favourites such as Käärijä and Baby Lasagna come up against jury winners Loreen and Nemo, respectively.

In ten out of fifteen years since 2009, the two sides of the voting have disagreed on their respective winners, producing a ‘split decision’. The televote winner has taken the trophy in four of these years, with the other six winners being four jury favourites and two ‘compromise winners’. All six of the winning songs that did not win the televote still placed within the top five (three second, one third, one fourth, one fifth), demonstrating the influence that the televote still carries. The table below highlights the televote performances of every winning song since 2009.

* 2013 is excluded from most of my analysis as the EBU has never released a full split result from that year, only sharing the average ranking of each country from both the televote and the jury.

The changes to the voting in 2023 seem to have had the unintended consequence of making it more difficult for televote-friendly songs to win overall (one likely reason for this is a higher number of televote favourites qualifying for the final and possibly cancelling each other out), and since these have been introduced, no televote winner has taken the Eurovision trophy. This year, JJ won the contest for Austria despite only finishing fourth with the televote, behind Sweden, Estonia and televote winner Israel.

In both absolute terms and points per voting country (PPC), “Wasted Love” has the lowest televote score of any winning song since 2009, scoring 178 points (4.81 PPC). This record was previously held by Azerbaijan’s Ell and Nikki with 5.31 PPC. JJ also scored the lowest percentage of available televote points of any winner since 2009, with just over 40% of the maximum. In addition, the last three years have seen the most one-sided winners since the split voting system was introduced, with JJ, Nemo and Loreen scoring a smaller proportion of their points from the televote than any previous winner.

If we instead think about songs which have won the televote since 2009, we see that, as discussed previously, these are identical to the overall winners for the first few years, but there are quite a few differences in more recent times. Since the current voting system was introduced in 2016, the televote winner has only taken the overall title on four out of nine occasions. We have seen, however, the tendency of the public to cluster around one entry more than the music industry professionals, as the televote-winning score has been higher than the jury-winning score in all but two years.

Of course, there is one clear anomaly in the data above, and that is Ukraine’s Kalush Orchestra in 2022. In the aftermath of the Russian invasion, the group rode a wave of public support to absolutely sweep the televote, achieving both the highest score and greatest lead of all time. “Stefania” scored an incredible 11.26 PPC, as well as 28 sets of douze points and a lead over second place of 200 points. I bring this up because, as you might expect, this tops any and every conceivable ranking and isn’t overly helpful for analysis, so whilst I will of course acknowledge the brilliant accomplishments of Ukraine and Kalush, the next few paragraphs will generally discuss the other televote winners.

This year, Israel won the televote, with Yuval Raphael scoring 297 points. Much like JJ’s jury victory, and of course overall win, “New Day Will Rise” didn’t take its title particularly emphatically; its PPC score of 8.03 is the lowest of any televote winner since 2019, and ranks eleventh out of fifteen overall. Israel scored 13 sets of 12 points, which does clear most former winners, however, I’ll explain at some point why I have questions about this result. The country also received 66.89% of the maximum possible score from the televote: this stands up well to previous winners, as shown below.

Hopefully it is clear that since 2009, the vast majority of televote winners have scored somewhere in the range of 60-80% of the maximum possible score; as previously stated, this is higher than that seen in the jury winners. Despite this apparent tendency for the televote to heavily back just one entry, televote winners tend to have a smaller lead over their nearest competitor than jury winners. With a few notable exceptions, televote winners rarely achieve a lead of 20% or more, and Israel’s lead this year of 8.78% would have been considered average in the 2018-2021 period (before the 2022 Ukrainian landslide and, notably, the re-introduction of televote-only semi-finals).

I said a very similar thing in my analysis of this year’s jury votes, but in any other year, Yuval Raphael would probably not have won the televote. Again, I will come to some of the external factors that may have helped her to eventually do so, but if ever there was a year for a Käärijä or a Baby Lasagna to come and wipe the floor with everyone else, this was it! “Cha Cha Cha” scored more points from the televote in 2023 than “New Day Will Rise” did from both sides of the voting combined. This year, quite a few countries did reasonably well in the televote, but no song managed to garner the widespread appeal necessary to take the overall title. Thirteen countries received douze points from at least one other country’s televote – the highest number since 2021 – showing once again how spread out these results really were. Let’s take a deep-dive into the numbers.

As mentioned previously, Israel was this year’s televote winner with a score of 297 points. I’ve spoken a bit about this already, and will go into more depth in the future, so I won’t add too much more here. Israel received points from all countries bar three, including the maximum 12 points from the Rest of the World. Other countries to award Yuval Raphael the douze included the Netherlands and Spain – both of which have said they will withdraw from Eurovision if Israel is allowed to participate next year – as well as Azerbaijan, which was the only country to award Israel 24 points; that is, 12 from both the televote and the jury.

Israel’s nearest rival in the televote was eventual third-place finisher Tommy Cash from Estonia. Despite being performed very early on in the show, “Espresso macchiato” managed to win over audiences all over Europe, scoring 258 points and receiving marks from every country except France. Estonia scored five sets of 12 points, primarily from fellow Eastern European nations, and another eleven countries ranked Tommy Cash in the top three. However, the country only received 2 points from the Rest of the World, which, given the tight margin between Israel and Estonia on the final scoreboard, means that “Espresso macchiato” would have finished second had it not been for this vote.

Third place went to pre-contest favourites Sweden, who finished fourth overall with “Bara bada bastu”. Despite being predicted to win the televote in a landslide, the song only scored 195 points, quite adrift of the two countries ahead. This entry was received very differently in different parts of the continent: KAJ scored 12 points from Nordic neighbours Denmark, Estonia, Finland and Norway, and scored highly from several other countries in this part of Europe. However, Sweden scored significantly fewer points from Mediterranean and other Southern European nations, and even failed to receive any points at all from two countries. The song scored 6 points from the Rest of the World.

Eventual winner Austria finished fourth in the televote, scoring 178 points. Again, I’ve spoken a little about this result already and there’s not too much more to add, but I will also share that JJ received points from 33 out of a possible 37 countries, including 1 point from the Rest of the World. Six countries placed “Wasted Love” in the top three, however, the song failed to score a single douze points, making JJ the second winner in three years to take the Eurovision trophy without being a single country’s televote winner (Loreen also achieved this in 2023).

Rounding out the televote’s top five was Albania’s Shkodra Elektronike, who came in just behind Austria with 173 points. “Zjerm” received 12 points from both Greece and Montenegro, and was ranked in the top three by a further seven countries, as well as the Rest of the World, which placed Albania second, awarding the country 10 points. Despite this high score, Albania still failed to receive any points from eleven countries, demonstrating its lack of widespread appeal compared to the songs that finished above it.

Ziferblat from Ukraine performing at Eurovision 2025. (photo: Corinne Cumming/EBU)

Sixth place went to Ukraine, who scored 158 points. Ziferblat received points from 25 out of 37 countries, including maximum marks from Czechia, Israel and Poland. Poland has awarded Ukraine the douze in every possible grand final since 2018, and Czechia has done the same since 2022. Another four countries ranked “Bird of Pray” in the top three, and on top of this, Ukraine received 8 points from the Rest of the World. Personally, I think this is much higher than the song deserved, and do believe that Ukraine still have an intrinsic advantage with the televote, though clearly not to the extent we saw in 2022.

Next was Justyna Steczkowska from Poland, who finished seventh in the televote with 139 points. “Gaja” received votes from 22 countries, including 12 points from Iceland and Ireland (the latter of which has been noted for its sizeable Polish diaspora) and 4 points from the Rest of the World. Justyna was followed by Klavdia from Greece, who scored 126 points, with maximum marks from Albania, San Marino and of course perennial friendly voters Cyprus. “Asteromáta” was ranked in the top three by a further four countries, and received a very respectable 7 points from the Rest of the World.

Poland's Justyna Steczkowska finished in the televote's top ten at Eurovision 2025. (photo: Alma Bengtsson/EBU)

Ninth place went to another pre-contest favourite in Finland’s Erika Vikman. In possibly the most clear example of the opinions of the Eurovision community differing from those of the general public, “Ich Komme” barely made it into triple figures with the televote, scoring 108 points, having previously been suggested as a potential winner (including, I must add, by myself). Finland didn’t receive any sets of 12 points, however received 10 from neighbours Estonia and Sweden, as well as Australia, and 5 points from the Rest of the World.

The final song to crack the televote’s top ten was “Volevo essere un duro” for Italy, which finished fifth overall. Lucio Corsi scored 97 points, including 12 from Slovenia and top-three rankings from another five countries. However, eighteen countries, as well as the Rest of the World, failed to award the country any points at all. We then have a bit of a dip to Germany, who earned eleventh place with a score of 74 points. In by far the country’s best televote result since 2018, Abor and Tynna scored 12 points from Austria, with 8 points from Lithuania being their next-highest mark.

Kyle Alessandro from Norway finished twelfth in the televote with 67 points. Despite opening the show, “Lighter” scored points from 17 out of 37 countries, including 10 points from Ukraine and 8 from Iceland. The last country to make it onto the left-hand side of the scoreboard (with the televote) was Lithuania, who scored 62 points. As is often the case, this was helped not insignificantly by the country’s diaspora, with “Tavo akys” being ranked in the top three by Ireland, Latvia, Ukraine and the UK. However, the song did prove to be somewhat divisive as only eleven countries gave it any points.

Erika Vikman performed "Ich Komme" in the grand final of Eurovision 2025. (photo: Sarah Louise Bennett/EBU)

Next was another pre-contest favourite, and my personal prediction for the winner, in France’s Louane. Whilst I’d thought it would be the song to most effectively appeal to both sides of the voting, “Maman” only managed to score 50 points from the televote, in a result strikingly similar to Destiny’s “Je me casse” in 2021. France’s highest marks were 10 points from Armenia and 8 from Belgium. Behind Louane is a tie for fifteenth place, with the Netherlands beating Latvia by virtue of having received points from more countries, despite both finishing with 42 points.

Despite receiving nul points from the juries, Iceland managed to rack up 33 points from the public to leave them seventeenth. The nine countries to award Væb points were primarily fellow Nordic nations, and the boys’ highest mark was a particularly generous 10 points from Denmark. They were followed by Parg from Armenia, who scored 30 points from just five countries. “Survivor” actually received two-thirds of its televote score from just two countries, with France awarding 8 points and the Georgian public deeming the song worthy of douze points.

We come now to Laura Thorn of Luxembourg, who scored 24 points from the televote despite performing in the so-called ‘death slot’. The country received votes from five other countries, including 8 points from both Albania and Montenegro. Laura was followed by San Marino’s Gabry Ponte, scoring 18 points to leave him in twentieth place with the public. Perhaps unsurprisingly, most of “Tutta L’Italia”’s score came from Italy, who awarded the song 12 points. Albania and Malta – both countries with noted tendencies to support Italy in Eurovision – were the only other countries to vote for San Marino. This made San Marino the lowest-ranked country overall to receive any sets of 12 points, as well as the first last-place finisher to receive 12 points since No Angels in 2008 (although they technically weren’t last due to the tie-break rules).

Portugal scored 13 points from the televote at Eurovision 2025. (photo: Alma Bengtsson/EBU)

Portugal were next, with “Deslocado” receiving just 13 points from the European public. This consisted entirely of 8 points from Luxembourg and 5 from France: again, both countries with a noted Portuguese diaspora. However, the recent commercial success of the song makes me feel that the boys from Napa won’t be losing too much sleep about this result. Next was another Iberian nation in Spain, who scored 10 points, including 3 from the Rest of the World. It was, however, Portugal that contributed the majority of Melody’s televote score, awarding her 6 points.

Malta’s Miriana Conte was another contestant to perform worse than expected in the televote, with “Serving” only managing a score of 8 points. I spoke briefly about why I wasn’t necessarily too surprised by this in my initial post-show analysis, and I stand by the fact that I think the final performance was just a bit too much. Malta received 5 points from Australia, and three countries awarded Miriana 1 point. Sissal from Denmark was the last contestant to score any points from the televote, achieving a score of 2 points, both of which came from Iceland in a classic act of reciprocal awarding of votes.

Sissal from Denmark scored just 2 points from the televote at Eurovision 2025. (photo: Corinne Cumming/EBU)

For the first time since 2021, and only the second time since televoting was introduced, this year saw more than one country receive nul points from the public. Whilst it wasn’t quite the dramatic result we had four years ago, when four countries failed to score, the televote’s failure to reward the UK and Switzerland – both countries that had been ranked in the top ten by the juries – certainly shook the scoreboard up somewhat. Switzerland’s Zoë Më finished second with the juries, scoring 214 points, and was left right until the end of the show to find out her televote score, which was possibly the gravest miscarriage of justice in recent Eurovision history. This was the second consecutive year of the UK being snubbed by the televote, however, Remember Monday’s jury score of 88 points was enough to keep them away from the very bottom of the final scoreboard.

Sometimes in Eurovision, a song performs worse than expected simply by being average. The way the voting system works means that a country needs to finish in the top ten of a jury or televote ranking in order to score any points, hence a more divisive song that ranks very well with a select few countries will outscore a song that everybody deems to be in the middle of the pack. To gain a more accurate picture of what the public thought of the UK and Switzerland, we can look at where they were ranked by all of the other voting countries, as this information is made public by the EBU.

The above data illustrates the number of times each of the UK and Switzerland received every ordinal ranking from 11^th-26^th in a country’s televote. Switzerland received an average ranking of 19.73, whilst for the UK this was three places lower, at 22.76. The closest Switzerland came to receiving points from any country was with Portugal, who ranked “Voyage” eleventh. By contrast, no country placed Remember Monday any higher than eighteenth, and only five countries ranked “What the Hell Just Happened?” higher than twentieth.

Looking at a head-to-head comparison in the 36 countries that could vote for both the UK and Switzerland (again, the Rest of the World is counted as a single country), Switzerland were ranked higher in 29 of them, with the UK on top in the remaining seven. All of this seems to provide quite damning evidence that Switzerland beat the UK in this year’s televote; no statistician in their right mind would dispute that conclusion. However, the EBU’s tie-break rules mean that in the event of multiple countries failing to score any points, they shall be ranked according to running order, with entries performed earlier in the show deemed to have finished higher. It is for that reason that the UK officially finished twenty-fifth in the televote, leaving Switzerland as the official last place.

Let’s now take a slight side-step and look at which countries were ranked first by the most other countries’ televotes. Obviously I discussed some of this earlier on when I mentioned who had received 12 points most frequently, but once again I’ll say that a whopping thirteen countries received at least one douze points; once again highlighting the more even distribution of points this year. Israel received the most maximum marks, with thirteen. There is then a bit of a gulf before we reach Estonia with five, Sweden with four, Greece and Ukraine both with three, and Albania and Poland each with two. Armenia, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania and San Marino each received one set of 12 points from the televote.

The image above illustrates the lines drawn across the continent this year. Israel received 12 points from most of Western Europe, as well as the Rest of the World televote, which has never failed to award the country the douze. Most Nordic countries instead went for KAJ from Sweden, and many Balkan countries voted for Greece or Albania. We also saw other instances of neighbourly and diaspora voting, including Armenia’s 12 points from Georgia and Poland scoring the Irish douze. This year, the only countries to ‘share the love’ and award each other 12 points in the televote were Albania and Greece.

At the bottom of the scoreboard, despite finishing with nul points overall, Switzerland was only ranked last by one country’s televote (Malta), whilst the UK was put at the bottom by eight other countries. However, the award (?) for most last-place rankings went, as it did with the juries, to San Marino, who was given the wooden spoon by nine countries, as well as the Rest of the World televote. Denmark received five, Armenia and Portugal both three, Malta two, and several different countries were ranked last by a single country’s televote.

Unsurprisingly, Armenia was ranked last by Azerbaijan’s televote. The televote ‘mutual dislike’ award goes to Portugal and San Marino, both of whom ranked the other last in the televote. In the jury vote, I mentioned a couple of ‘ungrateful recipients of 12 points’; we didn’t have any of those in the televote, though Lithuania ranked the UK last despite receiving 8 points from the British public. Again, these ‘awards’ are intended to be taken in good humour.

This year, four countries awarded another the maximum 24 points: that is to say, the jury and the televote agreed on a winner. I previously mentioned Azerbaijan giving Israel the ‘double douze’, but we also had Lithuania awarding Latvia the maximum, Slovenia voting heavily for Italy and of course Greece received 12 points from both the Cypriot jury and televote. At the other end of the spectrum, six countries chose the same wooden spoon from both televote and jury. Of course, this included Azerbaijan, who ranked Armenia last in both sides of the voting. The other five countries all clearly decided that San Marino was the worst of the night: Australia, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the UK all ranked “Tutta L’Italia” last in both the televote and the jury.

I’d now like to have a slightly closer look at the results of the Rest of the World vote this year. I mentioned earlier a few occasions when countries had received points from the Rest of the World, but here is the full result. As they have done every year since 2023, Israel received 12 points, and they were followed by Albania, Ukraine, Greece, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Spain and Estonia, with eventual winner Austria being the last country to score from the non-participating countries.

On the surface, this shouldn’t be a surprise. Albania has a sizeable international diaspora and the country is another one that often scores well from the Rest of the World for that reason. We can probably make similar arguments for Ukraine, Greece, Poland and Spain. Sweden and Finland (and Austria to a lesser extent) were fan favourites, whilst Estonia had the novelty element to it. It’s interesting to note that of these countries, nine finished in the overall televote top ten, with Spain being the most elevated country (replacing Italy in the top ten).

For some reason, the EBU doesn’t explicitly publish the ranking of the Rest of the World televote. However, due to the way in which results are presented on the Eurovision website, we are able to work out the positions of most countries. This is shown in the image below. From the information we have, it is not possible to work out whether Germany finished ahead of the Netherlands, and similarly where France were ranked in relation to Norway. However, the rest of the ranking should be correct, and I have also included the change from the overall televote ranking.

The countries with the biggest rise in position from the overall result were Spain (as previously discussed), Malta (who also had the fan favourite status and elements of notoriety) and Armenia – another country with significant diaspora populations elsewhere. Estonia, Austria, Italy and San Marino suffered the biggest fall in positions*; however, these were not as significant as the previously mentioned increases. Israel and Poland were the only countries to be ranked in exactly the same position by the Rest of the World and the overall televote.

* Norway also suffered a significant fall compared to the overall televote result, but as previously mentioned, we cannot be sure of the exact ranking change.

Now the experimental statistics will be making a return, as I once again try to work out which countries’ televotes were the most ‘mainstream’, and which were a bit more… left-field. For a full explanation of my methodology, see my jury results analysis – these findings have been obtained in exactly the same way. Before I start, I should mention that I won’t be including the Rest of the World in my statistics here, nor San Marino as its televote consists of an aggregated ranking of other countries. I will, however, mention that the Rest of the World vote exhibited strong positive correlation with the overall result, and the aggregated Sammarinese televote perhaps unsurprisingly had one of the strongest correlation coefficient values, at 0.88.

Again, it shouldn’t be a surprise that every country’s televote ranking displayed at least moderately strong positive correlation with the overall result. The least ‘mainstream’ country was Estonia, and by some distance too, with a correlation coefficient of 0.41. This was largely down to the Estonian public ranking popular songs from Poland, Greece and Albania very low indeed. Another six countries had correlation coefficient values lower than 0.6, falling into the ‘moderate’ category. These countries’ televoters exhibited the least agreement with the prevailing opinion and would be considered to be the least ‘mainstream’.

Conversely, nine countries had correlation coefficients greater than 0.8, with their agreement with the overall result being deemed to be ‘very strong’ (this does not include the aforementioned aggregated Sammarinese televote). The country with the most ‘mainstream’ televoters was Czechia, which had a correlation coefficient of 0.91 and awarded points to eight of the eventual televote top ten. The data here does go further towards implying that the televote tend to cluster more around the same entries, as many of this year’s national juries exhibited significantly weaker correlation with the overall jury result, demonstrating that the professional panels are likely to produce a more even result.

Another interesting thing to look at is the effect of the running order on the behaviour of televoters. It has long been suggested in the Eurovision community that performing near the start of the show can prove to be a disadvantage for an artist, and many people would point to previous acts such as We Are Domi or Teya and Salena as entries that underperformed in the final televote compared with the semi-final and performed very early on. Last year, in an apparent attempt to mitigate this, the vote was opened before the first song was performed and closed during the interval. That was also the case this year. In addition, viewers in non-participating countries are able to vote before the show has even started, to allow for different time zones.

It is therefore not a huge surprise to see that this year, the televote seemed in fact to have a bias in the favour of entries performed near the start of the show. With the televote’s first and second place, Israel and Estonia, both in the first four songs of the night, and Ukraine and Austria also in the first ten, there were some real heavyweights this year throwing our hypothesis out of the window. In fact, only four countries’ televotes this year exhibited a bias in favour of entries performed later, and none of these were particularly strong.

Switzerland’s bias was the strongest (and as such I would deem the country’s televoters to be the ‘most affected’ by running order) and even then the correlation between a higher televote rank and later running order position was only measured to be 0.12 (very weak). The countries with the televoters most and least affected by running order are listed below. Due to my hypothesis, I use ‘most affected’ to mean a stronger bias towards songs performed at the end of the show, and ‘least affected’ to mean a stronger bias towards songs performed at the start of the show.

Finally, it’s time to talk about the jury-televote split, and which countries’ televoters agreed the most with their national experts. This year, the overall correlation between the rankings of the two sides of the vote was measured at 0.20, indicating weak positive correlation. Of course, positive correlation is to be expected as we can probably assume that the experts and the public get the same general impression of most of the songs, however, in a year with results as disparate as this, the correlation will naturally not be as strong as in other years.

In terms of raw scores, the country with the greatest disparity between its jury score and televote score was Israel, with a 237-point gap. On the other side of things, Switzerland scored 214 points from the juries but 0 from the public, creating the second-largest difference this year. Another four countries had disparities of more than 100 points. Since the splitting of the votes in 2016, Israel’s jury-televote difference of 237 has only been surpassed by three entries: Ukraine’s Kalush Orchestra in 2022 (247), Norway’s KEiiNO in 2019 (251) and Israel’s own Eden Golan last year, whose televote score was a huge 271 points more than what she received from the juries.

On the other side of things, Luxembourg had the most evenly split result this year, with only a one-point difference between the two scores. They were closely followed by Germany and San Marino, both of whom also had disparities of less than ten points. Of the overall top ten, Greece was the country that received the most consistent scores, earning just 21 more points from the televote than the juries. Since 2016, Laura Thorn’s feat has been matched by Lithuania in 2018, Azerbaijan in 2021 and France in 2022, whilst four acts have achieved exactly the same score from both sides of the voting: Germany 2017, Finland 2018, Iceland 2022 and… the UK 2021. But the less said about that last one, the better.

This year, the country with the most agreement between its jury and televote was Lithuania, with a correlation coefficient of 0.67. Three other countries fell into the ‘strong correlation’ range with values above 0.6. On the other hand, five countries had negative correlation between the two rankings, implying that the music industry ‘experts’ were deeply out of touch with the opinions of the people. Interestingly, one of these countries was San Marino, though maybe this isn’t surprising when you consider that the televote result was constructed based on other countries’ results, and also that the Sammarinese jury result in both Semi-Final 1 and the final seemed to be a bit of an outlier.

Of the countries where negative correlation was seen, Czechia was the only one to show ‘weak’ negative correlation as opposed to ‘very weak’. This was largely down to a few major differences in the rankings (such as the UK, which was ranked 2^nd by the jury but 26^th (last) by the televote). Italy had a similar thing happen, interestingly enough also with the UK, who scored the jury’s 12 points but were ranked 24^th by the public. The other instances of negative correlation were incredibly weak and in reality virtually no correlation was seen.

With that, I’ll bring this article, and my series analysing the results of Eurovision 2025, to its conclusion. I’ve really enjoyed looking a bit more closely at all the numbers, so hopefully you have enjoyed reading it, and thank you if you have made it this far. This also marks the end of my Eurovision 2025 coverage. Of course, this has been my first Eurovision season blogging, so there’s been much learning as I’ve gone along but I think I’ve found my stride and am looking forward to continue sharing my Eurovision-related thoughts during the off-season. Whilst posts may not be ever so regular for the next few months, there will definitely be a few exciting things coming so please do stick around and keep an eye on my social media, particularly Bluesky, where I’ll share any new posts as and when they are released.