Country comparison · 214 cities measured
Mexico vs Philippines Air quality index (AQI) and deforestation
Philippines has cleaner air than Mexico right now: its cities average AQI 43 against 69.
At ground stations alone, which measure rather than estimate, the averages are Mexico 91 (46 cities) and Philippines 68 (34 cities). Mexico has lost more forest since 2001. Philippines has more tree cover in its cities.
Average of 114 cities
AQI 69
Moderate
Cleaner on average
- At ground stations
- AQI 91
- Tree cover
- 14.6%
- Forest lost since 2001
- 5.46 million ha
Average of 100 cities
AQI 43
Good
Cleaner on average
- At ground stations
- AQI 68
- Tree cover
- 40.9%
- Forest lost since 2001
- 1.53 million ha
Updated . Lower is better on the US EPA index: 0–50 is Good, above 300 is Hazardous. Measured by Airleaf.
Mexico69Philippines43
Head to head
Mexico vs Philippines at a glance
Philippines is ahead on 6 of 6 measures, and Mexico on 0. The better figure in each row is marked.
| Mexico | Philippines | |
|---|---|---|
| Average air qualityUS AQI, all measured cities. | 69 | 43 (better) |
| At ground stationsCities with a current station reading. | 91 | 68 (better) |
| Cities over AQI 100Not fine for sensitive groups. | 22% | 10% (better) |
| Forest lost since 2001The whole country. | 5.46 million ha | 1.53 million ha (better) |
| Share of its forest lostOf what it had in 2000. | 10% | 8.4% (better) |
| Average tree coverAcross its measured cities. | 14.6% | 40.9% (better) |
Air quality today
Is Philippines cleaner than Mexico?
On air quality, yes, right now. Philippines has cleaner air than Mexico right now: its cities average AQI 43 against 69.
At ground stations alone, which measure rather than estimate, the averages are Mexico 91 (46 cities) and Philippines 68 (34 cities).
22% of the measured cities in Mexico are over AQI 100 today, the point where the air stops being fine for sensitive groups, against 10% in the Philippines.
How each country's cities split across the air quality bands
Mexico
- Good38 (33%)
- Moderate51 (45%)
- Unhealthy for sensitive groups24 (21%)
- Unhealthy1 (1%)
Philippines
- Good66 (66%)
- Moderate24 (24%)
- Unhealthy for sensitive groups5 (5%)
- Unhealthy5 (5%)
Every measured city, including model estimates where no ground station is near.
Against everywhere else
How do Mexico and Philippines compare with other countries?
Right now the cities of Mexico average cleaner air than 25% of the 171 countries Airleaf has enough cities to average, and those of the Philippines than 65%.
Cleaner air than…
- Mexico
- Beats 25%
- Philippines
- Beats 65%
More tree cover than…
- Mexico
- Beats 29%
- Philippines
- Beats 90%
Deforestation · 2001–2025
Which country has lost more forest, Mexico or Philippines?
Mexico has lost more: about 5.46 million ha of forest from 2001 to 2025, against 1.53 million ha in the Philippines, or 3.6 times as much. 4.39 million ha of Mexico's was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns; the rest burned, was logged or can grow back.
The whole country, from the yearly satellite maps of forest loss: unlike the city averages above, this counts every forest, not just the land around cities.
Worst year: 2024, with 332,000 ha lost.
Worst year: 2016, with 126,000 ha lost.
| Mexico | Philippines | |
|---|---|---|
| Forest lost since 2001Cleared, burned or logged. | 5.46 million ha | 1.53 million ha (better) |
| Share of its forestOf what it had in 2000. | 10% | 8.4% (better) |
| Cleared for goodTurned into farms, mines or towns. | 4.39 million ha | 939,000 ha (better) |
| Recent trend2021–2025 against the five years before. | Holding steady | Slowing down |
| Main known cause | Farms, pasture and plantations (79%) | Farms, pasture and plantations (60%) |
Trees
Which country has more tree cover, Mexico or Philippines?
Philippines does: its measured cities average 40.9% tree cover against 14.6%, a gap of 26.3 percentage points.
| Mexico | Philippines | |
|---|---|---|
| Trees standingSummed across measured cities. | 5.1M | 11.3M (better) |
| Cities below their targetShort of the canopy target. | 94% | 22% (better) |
| Trees still neededTo reach those targets. | 6.1M | 562K (better) |
Behind the averages
The cities behind Mexico and Philippines
An average says nothing about how far apart the best and worst places are. These are the measured cities at each end.
Philippines
- Greenest measured city
- Catbalogan74.4% tree cover
- Worst air right now
- San Jose del MonteAQI 162
Reading these numbers
What a country average is, and is not
It is a mean of cities
Not a national statistic. Each figure is the average across the cities Airleaf has measured: 114 in Mexico and 100 in the Philippines, each read over the same 2 km radius, on the US EPA index. Rural land and unmeasured towns are not in it.
Coverage shapes the number
A country measured mostly in its capital reads differently from one measured across dozens of towns. Mexico rests on 114 cities against 100, so its average is the steadier of the two. Forest figures come from the University of Maryland's Global Forest Change maps.
Frequently asked
Mexico vs Philippines: your questions answered
Is Philippines cleaner than Mexico?
On air quality, yes, right now: Philippines's cities average AQI 43 against 69 on the US EPA index. These are live readings averaged across cities, so the gap moves with the weather. At ground stations alone, which measure rather than estimate, the averages are Mexico 91 (46 cities) and Philippines 68 (34 cities).
Which country has lost more forest, Mexico or Philippines?
Mexico has lost more: about 5.46 million ha of forest from 2001 to 2025, against 1.53 million ha in the Philippines, or 3.6 times as much. 4.39 million ha of Mexico's was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns; the rest burned, was logged or can grow back.
Which country has more tree cover, Mexico or Philippines?
Philippines does: its measured cities average 40.9% tree cover against 14.6%, a gap of 26.3 percentage points.
How many cities are the Mexico and Philippines figures based on?
114 measured cities in Mexico and 100 in the Philippines. Every one was read the same way, so the two averages are directly comparable, but a country with more measured cities has the more settled figure.
Why are there two air quality averages for each country?
The first covers every measured city, using a ground station where one is close and a model estimate everywhere else. The second counts only cities with a current station reading, which is measured rather than estimated but covers fewer places. Airleaf's world rankings use the station figures only.
Does this cover the whole of Mexico and the Philippines?
The air and tree figures are not: they are the cities Airleaf has measured, each over the same 2 km radius, so treat them as a comparison of urban air and urban tree cover. The forest figures are: they count every forest in the country.
More comparisons for Mexico
More comparisons for Philippines
Build your own
Compare Mexico with somewhere else
This place
Mexico