More predictive in what regard? The only way I can see it being usefully predictive is if you count on the larger entity annexing the smaller one. An I missing something?
That’s why I object to article’s angle: it uses “China” to refer to an aggregate in one case (lumping ROC and PRC together), and to PRC in another case (quoting their president and intentions to dominate global economy).
Counting ROC in PRC’s favor serves to tip the numbers and make article’s premise seem more compelling, but since PRC and ROC are separate economies the premise is false. It almost makes it look like a major business publication is playing a political game.
There are MANY ways to derive benefit from a relationship between countries: it’s not binary annex/not-annexed.