Ken B., another Australian reader, wasn't too proud of this effort, apparently excerpted from an HSBC report by the Sydney Morning Herald (link):
Ken: If you plot ranking by ranking it magically turns into a straight line.
There are a few other annoyances. Gridlines, data labels, double-edged arrow, bars all based on the same data, which can easily be conveyed with a ranked table. In fact, just turn the chart 90 degrees clockwise, get rid of everything else except the names of countries, and you have a much more readable figure.
The completely unnecessary legend is an Excel special. If only one data series is plotted, it should be automatic to suppress the legend.
The three-letter acronyms for different currencies is a futile educational lesson kind of like plotting geographical data on maps (in many cases). For most readers, the message of the chart does not require knowing the names of the currencies, nor their acronyms. For those who care about acronyms, say currency traders, they most likely already know those letters.
Just like I don't understand how we can define "over-rated" or "under-rated" restaurants (see this post and this), I also don't understand how we can define "over-valued" or "under-valued" currencies given the impossiblity of knowing the "true value" of any currency.
I just had to point your attention to the fact that 123 people tweeted this article, and 221 liked this item on Facebook. And these actions form part of the so-called Big Data revolution.