North Korea Labor Force Participation Rate

Name: North Korea Labor Force Participation Rate
Creator: Agentic Investor

North Korea · Annual series · EC-KP-LFPR

Latest, 2019

70.5%

+0.00pp from 2018

Open interactive chartNorth Korea Labor Force Participation Rate in the app

History through 2019, the forecast path to 2022 (dashed) and its 80% interval (shaded).

Forecast

Forecast for 2022: 70.5%, with an 80% interval of 69.7% to 70.9%.

Forecast path. Intervals are shown where available.
Period	Forecast	80% low	80% high
2020	70.5%	70.2%	70.7%
2021	70.5%	70.0%	70.8%
2022	70.5%	69.7%	70.9%

Model: Agentic Investor TSFM (foundation model). Forecast generated 2026-11-15.

AI confidence

Limited evidence

At least 6 complete tests are required; 3 are available.

Model: Agentic Investor TSFM (foundation model)

Accuracy vs naive: n/aToo few tests (3 tests, 6 needed) (3 tests, 2 won)
Direction: n/aToo few tests (3 tests, 6 needed) (6 of 6 calls right in 2 tests)
Turning points: n/aToo few tests (3 tests, 6 needed) (0 turns in 3 tests, 3 without a turn)

Error vs baseline: 58% higherError ratio 1.58; 1.00 is a tie.
Tests won: 2 / 3Complete rolling backtests; ties count as no win.
Test period: 2011-12-01 to 2019-12-013 observations ahead per test.
80% band coverage: 78%Observed outcomes inside the band across all stored test windows.

Band coverage uses all stored test windows, including model-selection windows when present; it does not determine the confidence label.
Evaluated 2026-11-15 against the cached history through 2019-12-01.
This is an evaluation of the serving model; it does not establish a winner across four model classes.

How this assessment is made

AI confidence describes historical evidence for this forecast, not a probability of being correct. Each backtest fits on data available before its test window. The baseline carries the last value forward. Supported evidence requires at least six complete, non-overlapping tests, an error ratio below 0.90 (rounded to two decimals), and wins in a majority of tests. Ratios from 0.90 to below 1.10 are on par; 1.10 or above is weak evidence. Inconsistent wins produce mixed evidence. For a selected model, only the recent tests excluded from model selection determine this label. These are historical simulations using the available data, not a live trading track record; revisions and foundation-model pretraining can limit how closely they reproduce a past decision. Past performance can change.

Replay past tests

Model comparison

Comparison pendingA new ticker first receives its serving model's forecast and evaluation. An eligible nightly batch can compare both candidates, subject to call budgets and retry limits.

Reading

It is above 0% of the 9 earlier readings since 2010.

Written from the figures by a fixed template; no AI model is involved.

Recent history (24 observations)

The 24 most recent observations, newest first.
Period	Value
2019	70.5%
2018	70.5%
2017	70.5%
2016	70.5%
2015	79.5%
2014	79.5%
2013	79.6%
2012	79.8%
2011	79.9%
2010	80.2%
2009	80.5%
2008	80.6%
2007	80.7%
2006	81.0%
2005	81.3%
2004	81.5%
2003	81.9%
2002	82.1%
2001	82.4%
2000	82.6%
1999	82.9%
1998	83.2%
1997	83.4%
1996	83.6%

Source

Data: public market data feeds.