Four years of PBBM vs four years of PNoy

The second quarter economic numbers are out. The statistics reveal an accurate snapshot of President Marcos Junior’s performance after four years in office.

Statistics, however, tell us little without proper context. So let us compare how the economy fared on year four under PBBM against year four under PNoy.

The economy grew by an anemic 2.6 percent in the first semester of 2026, the slowest expansion since the pandemic. Yes, the Iran war played a part. But judging from the performance of our neighbors, the deceleration of the economy should not have been this severe.

Look beneath the headline and the reasons behind weaknesses become clear. In the first semester, industry contracted by 1.2 percent and construction plunged by 9.5 percent, while manufacturing grew by only 1.6 percent. Agriculture expanded by 1.2 percent and services by 4.5 percent. The economy is surviving on services while its productive foundations steadily weaken.

Compare this with 2014, Noynoy Aquino’s fourth year in office. GDP expanded by 6.2 percent. Industry grew by eight percent, manufacturing by more than eight percent and services by six. Although agriculture was weak, the industrial machinery of the country was thriving.

The difference is glaring. Under Aquino, factories, construction and investment drove growth. Under Marcos, industry is deteriorating.

Consumption, investments and tourism

Household consumption – the economy’s principal engine – grew by only 2.9 percent in the first semester of 2026. Government consumption increased by 6.7 percent and exports by 10 percent. But gross capital formation, which represents investment in future productive capacity, contracted by 6.5 percent.

In other words, government spending and exports kept the economy afloat while businesses invested less and families tightened their belts.

The contrast with 2014 is striking. Household consumption grew by more than five percent, exports expanded at double-digit rates and net foreign direct investment reached $5.7 billion for the full year, then a record. By comparison, FDI amounted to only $2.2 billion from January to May 2026, sharply lower than last year, according to the BSP.

Tourism tells a similar story. The Philippines received 4.83 million foreign visitors in 2014 despite coming from a very low base. Arrivals increased by only 3.2 percent that year, but the industry was building momentum. By 2019, arrivals had reached 8.26 million.

In the first half of 2026 under Marcos, total arrivals were only 3.16 million – still 23.5 percent below the comparable 2019 level.

What about ordinary Filipinos?

Inflation averaged 4.1 percent in 2014 while it averaged five percent from January to July 2026, even reaching 6.2 percent in July – well above the BSP’s target. Unemployment was around 6.6 percent in 2014, against roughly five percent today, although changes in definitions make a direct comparison imperfect.

Poverty declined substantially during Aquino’s term. Poverty incidence among Filipinos fell from 26.3 percent in 2009 to 21.6 percent in 2015. The latest comparable full survey placed poverty at 15.5 percent in 2023, but no 2026 figure exists. Marcos cannot claim a victory that has not been measured.

Then comes the balance sheet

At the end of 2014, national debt stood at P5.7 trillion, or about 45 percent of GDP. By June 2026, it exploded beyond P19 trillion, equivalent to roughly 61.8 percent of GDP. The peso, which averaged P44.40 to the dollar in 2014, is now P61.50. Under Marcos (and Duterte) the Filipino has become four times more in debt and 25 percent poorer in dollar terms.

Aquino left a current account surplus and foreign-exchange reserves of $79.5 billion – enough to cover 10.4 months of imports. Today, reserves are larger at $103 billion but sufficient for only 6.7 months of imports. Under Marcos, the current account has swung into deficit.

Public sentiment

Under Marcos, business confidence turned negative, as did consumer sentiment. Consumers cite inflation, inadequate income and corruption as reasons for uncertainty. Under Aquino, confidence surged, credit ratings rose repeatedly and the Philippines was transformed from Asia’s perennial laggard into one of its brightest economic stars.

In terms of soft power, the difference in national branding is unmistakable. Under Aquino, the Philippines became associated with democratic renewal, “It’s More Fun in the Philippines” and an emerging tiger economy. Under Marcos, the country has become associated with corruption, political discord and economic lethargy.

Corruption provides the most damning comparison. The Philippines ranked 85th among 175 countries in Transparency International’s 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index, the country’s best score to date. In 2025, it received a pitiful ranking of 120th among 182 countries.

Leadership performance

Aquino was not perfect. His administration suffered from underspending, lack of funds and a legacy of corruption from past administrations. But he delivered transformative reforms, namely, the Sin Tax Law, Responsible Parenthood Law, Competition Act, GOCC Governance Act, K-12 reform and responsible fiscal management. It achieved investment grade status and protected the national treasury from corruption.

Marcos passed useful measures, including the Public-Private Partnership Code, CREATE MORE and amendments encouraging foreign investment. But these have been overwhelmed by policy drift, uncontrolled deficits and runaway corruption.

Aquino governed with the intention of turning the country around. He insisted on prudence, pushed difficult reforms and treated corruption as an enemy of development.

Marcos’ motivation for being president is primarily to protect his family’s interest. He governs like a son of dictator – a prince who has not built anything enduring on his own. He relies on a broken and corrupt bureaucracy – a bureaucracy he has not even begun to reform. Many of his Cabinet secretaries are not the best in their field. His idea of leadership is to distribute subsidies and discounts that the next administration must pay for.

The statistics tell the whole story. Aquino strengthened the economy through reform, prudence and institutional discipline. Marcos is squandering those gains by plunging investments, runaway debt, corruption and directionless governance. He is wasting the country’s narrowing demographic window

PNoy was the better president – and it is not even close.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @aj_masigan