The IB Economics IA, explained: structure, word count, and how to score
By Aras Zirgulis, PhD · Professor of Economics, ISM University · June 12, 2026
The internal assessment is the only component of IB Economics with no clock on it. You can draft, get feedback, and redraft for as long as your school's deadlines allow — and it is worth 30 percent of your final grade at SL and 20 percent at HL. Those are banked marks you control before exam season even starts. Yet every year I meet students who treated the IA as an afterthought and went hunting for articles the week a commentary was due. That is the most expensive procrastination in the Diploma. This guide covers what the IA actually is, how examiners mark it, how to choose articles that make scoring easy, and an 800-word commentary structure with a word budget for every section.
What the IA actually is
The IA is a portfolio of three commentaries. A commentary is a short piece of written economic analysis — a maximum of 800 words — in which you take one published news article and explain what is going on in it using the models from the course. The rules, under the current syllabus (first assessment 2022):
- Three commentaries, 800 words maximum each. Diagrams, their labels, and references sit outside the word count, so the 800 words are pure analysis.
- Three different syllabus units.Each commentary must be based on a different unit of the course — in practice, most students cover microeconomics, macroeconomics, and the global economy.
- Three different articles from three different sources. One article per commentary, and each article must have been published no earlier than one year before you write the commentary about it. The clock runs from when you write, not from when the portfolio is submitted.
- Three different key concepts.Each commentary analyses its article through one of the course's nine key concepts — scarcity, choice, efficiency, equity, economic well-being, sustainability, change, interdependence, and intervention — and each commentary must use a different one.
Note what the IA is not: it is not an essay about a topic, and it is not a summary of a news story. It is applied analysis. The article supplies a real situation; you supply the economics.
How it is marked
The portfolio is worth 45 marks. Each commentary is marked against five criteria worth 14 marks in total, and a sixth criterion worth 3 marks is applied once to the whole portfolio — 14 × 3 + 3 = 45.
| Criterion | What it rewards | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| A — Diagrams | Relevant, accurate, fully labelled diagrams that are explained and connected to the article | 3 |
| B — Terminology | Economic terms relevant to the article, used correctly throughout | 2 |
| C — Application and analysis | Economic theory applied to the article's specific situation, with a clear chain of reasoning | 3 |
| D — Key concept | The chosen key concept used as a genuine lens for the analysis, not a label | 3 |
| E — Evaluation | Judgements supported by balanced, reasoned argument | 3 |
| F — Rubric requirements (whole portfolio) | Word counts respected, articles recent, different units, sources, and key concepts | 3 |
Read the weighting carefully, because it tells you where commentaries die. Diagrams, application, key concept, and evaluation are worth 3 marks each — four roughly equal pillars. Terminology is worth only 2, yet it is the criterion students obsess over, stuffing definitions into every paragraph. And criterion F is 3 marks of pure administration: a portfolio that breaks a word count or reuses a source donates marks for nothing. In my experience the cheapest gains sit in D and E — the key concept and the evaluation — because most students bolt both onto the end instead of building the commentary around them.
Choosing articles: the decision that determines your ceiling
By the time you start writing, most of your mark is already decided — by the article. A good article makes the diagram obvious, the analysis natural, and the evaluation rich. A bad one fights you for 800 words. Four rules of thumb:
- Pick an article that maps onto one diagram you can draw well.A fuel subsidy, a sugar tax, a rent cap, a new tariff — these are gifts, because each one is a single policy with a single textbook diagram and clear winners and losers. A sprawling think-piece about five overlapping policies is a trap: you will spend your word count explaining context instead of analysing.
- Pick from the units you understand best. The rubric forces three different units, but within each unit you choose the topic. If externalities click for you and monetary policy does not, hunt for an externality story for the micro commentary.
- Prefer short news reporting to opinion columns. Your job is to add the analysis. An op-ed has already analysed, which leaves you summarising someone else's argument — and summarising scores nothing under criterion C. A plain 300-word report that says what happened, with a number or two, is ideal raw material.
- Keep a running candidate file from month one. Because articles must be recent when you write, you cannot stockpile them years ahead — but you can build the habit. Whenever a headline makes you think “that is a price ceiling,” save the link with one line on the diagram it suggests. When a commentary is due, you choose from ten candidates instead of panic-searching at midnight.
The commentary skeleton
Here is the structure I would use, with rough word budgets. It is built backwards from the criteria: every section exists because a criterion pays for it. The budgets total about 780 words, leaving a small buffer under the limit.
1. The situation (~50 words).One or two sentences: what happened in the article, and what economic problem it raises. “Country X has capped retail fuel prices after a 40 percent price rise; the question is who gains, who loses, and whether the cap can hold.” No history, no background — the examiner has your article attached.
2. Terms and lens (~80 words).Define the two or three terms your analysis depends on — not ten — and name your key concept explicitly: “This commentary examines the cap through the lens of intervention.” Naming it early lets you return to it throughout, which is what criterion D rewards.
3. The diagram (outside the word count; ~150 words explaining it). Fully labelled: axes in words, curves named, equilibria marked, the policy drawn in. Crucially, make it article-specific. If the article says the cap is 1.20 per litre and the market price was 1.55, those numbers go on your price axis. Then walk the reader through it in prose: what the diagram shows, in the article's own terms.
4. Analysis (~250 words).The chain of reasoning, step by step: the cap sits below equilibrium, quantity supplied falls, quantity demanded rises, a shortage appears, and non-price rationing follows — queues, black markets, cross-border buying. Every step tied back to something in the article. This is where criterion C lives.
5. Evaluation (~250 words).Weigh, do not list. Stakeholders: who wins (consumers who still find fuel) and who loses (producers, consumers left in the queue). Short run against long run: a cap may shield households this winter and worsen supply next year. The depends-on factors: elasticity of supply, how far the cap sits below equilibrium, whether the government compensates sellers. Finish with a mini-conclusion you actually defend — one sentence of judgement and the single factor it leans on.
The point students miss most often: the diagram must belong to this article, not to the textbook. A generic supply-and-demand cross with P and Q on the axes signals that you drew it before you read the story. Real labels — the good, the country, the actual prices where the article gives them — are what separate the top band from the middle under criterion A.
The five mistakes that cost the most marks
- Generic diagrams with no article connection. A perfect textbook diagram that ignores the article caps your criterion A mark. Fix:put the article's good, country, and numbers on the diagram, and reference the diagram explicitly in your analysis.
- Describing the article instead of analysing it. Retelling the story scores nothing — the examiner can read. Fix: hold the summary to 50 words, then spend every remaining word explaining why things happen using a model.
- Quoting theory without applying it. A paragraph that defines price elasticity and moves on earns its 2 terminology marks at best. Fix:every theoretical claim gets an immediate “in this case” sentence anchored in the article.
- Ignoring the key concept.Many commentaries name a key concept in the first line and never mention it again — that is most of 3 marks gone. Fix: return to the lens at least twice: once inside the analysis, once inside the conclusion.
- Blowing the word count by narrating.Phrases like “the article goes on to state that” burn words and add nothing — and overshooting 800 words costs portfolio marks under criterion F. Fix: draft freely, then cut every sentence that mentions the article doing something instead of the economy doing something.
A timeline that avoids the deadline crush
The IA collapses when all three commentaries land in the same month as your extended essay and five other subjects. The fix is boring and completely effective: write each commentary shortly after its unit ends, while the theory is still fresh. Roughly one commentary per term. The recency rule helps you here — an article published during the unit is automatically valid when you write about it weeks later. Aim to have the full portfolio finished well before your school's deadline, so the final weeks are for polishing, not producing.
And the single best preparation runs in the background the whole time: drill the core diagrams until they are automatic. A commentary is much easier to write when the price-ceiling diagram draws itself and your working memory is free for the article. The free, no-signup problem sets on supply and demand, price ceilings and floors, and aggregate demand and supply cover the diagrams behind most IA articles, and the explainer library is there when a model refuses to stick. The diagram standard to aim for — fully labelled, from memory, in under a minute — is the same one I set out in the guide to getting a 7 in IB Economics.
Frequently asked questions
- How long should an IB Economics IA commentary be?
- Each commentary has a maximum of 800 words. Diagrams, their labels, and references sit outside the word count, so the 800 words are pure prose. There is no minimum, but commentaries that score well usually run close to the limit, because criterion E (evaluation) needs room to weigh arguments. Words spent summarising the article are words you cannot spend evaluating, so budget them deliberately.
- How many commentaries are in the IB Economics IA?
- Three. Together they form a portfolio worth 45 marks. Each commentary must be based on a different published news article from a different source, must cover a different unit of the syllabus, and must analyse its article through a different one of the course's nine key concepts. The portfolio is worth 30 percent of the final grade at SL and 20 percent at HL.
- How is the IB Economics IA marked?
- Each commentary is marked against five criteria worth 14 marks in total: A diagrams (3), B terminology (2), C application and analysis (3), D key concept (3), and E evaluation (3). A sixth criterion, F rubric requirements (3 marks), is applied once to the whole portfolio and checks the mechanical rules — word counts, article recency, and the different-units, different-sources, different-key-concepts requirements. That gives 14 times 3 plus 3, or 45 marks.
- What articles can I use for the IB Economics IA?
- Published news articles — each one published no earlier than one year before you write the commentary about it. You need one article per commentary, each from a different source, and each covering a different unit of the syllabus. Short, factual news reporting works better than opinion columns: the examiner wants your analysis, and an op-ed has already done the analysing for you.
- How much is the IA worth in IB Economics?
- 30 percent of the final grade at standard level and 20 percent at higher level. It is the only component you can draft, get feedback on, and redraft before submission, which makes it the highest-control marks in the subject. At SL, nearly a third of your grade can be effectively banked before you sit a single exam paper.
- Can I use the same diagram twice in my IA?
- There is no rubric requirement that forbids repeating a diagram type — the rules cover units, sources, and key concepts, not diagrams. In practice the question rarely arises, because the three commentaries come from three different syllabus units, so the natural diagram for each differs anyway. If your articles genuinely call for the same diagram, the safe move is to ask your teacher, who marks against the current guide and knows your school's expectations.
Make every diagram automatic before you draft — free
Econ Academy's practice pages let you work through supply and demand, price controls, taxes and subsidies, and AD/AS with draggable graphs and instant feedback — no signup required.