This report selects seven cities outside the Chinese mainland，including New York，São Paulo，Barcelona，Paris，Hong Kong，Singapore and Eindhoven，to compare 15 indicators in the areas of economic development，social life，environment and resources，consumption and emissions，and environmental governance. In order to better compare with Chinese cities and to fully reflect the economic，environmental and social impact of cities，all comparative cities except Singapore use indicator data that reflect the city’s metropolitan areas（including urban areas and surrounding suburbs and commuter areas）where data are available. Overall，China’s 100 large and medium-sized cities excel in some indicators in the field of economic development. Particularly，when the world was ravaged by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020，the compared cities showed varying degrees of economic recession，while China’s 100 cities still maintained economic growth of nearly 3 per cent and unemployment rate of only 3 per cent. In terms of social life and environmental governance，the performance of Chinese cities runs parallel with their international counterparts. However，in the areas of environment（especially air quality），consumption and emission，there is a significant gap between the Chinese mainland and the seven compared cities. In the indicators of these two areas，there is often a considerable gap between the Chinese cities that rank first and the leading international cities. In addition，among the 100 cities in China，there are many cities that rank first in China in terms of relevant indicators，such as the economic growth rate of Lhasa，the unemployment rate and per capita urban road area in Karamay，the ratio of primary and secondary school teachers and students in Dandong，the proportion of people aged 0-14 in Nanyang，and the per capita green space area of Zhuhai.