There is an ongoing theme within the field of peace conceptualisation to create and to add to the meaning of peace. This has caused a fragmented field with over 130 conceptualisations. As we move forward, it isthus necessary to review whether the methods utilised to measure peace are suitable in the ever changing contexts of today. Studies investigating levels of peace or types of peace are as important now as theywere before and as they will be in the future. As the world becomes more interconnected and complex in its actions, and as more conflicts emerge, it is important that those involved, both directly and indirectly, understand what to strive for and how far away from that goal they are. Thus, it is extremely important to examine to what extent the measuring systems of peace and adjacent topics today reflect peace. This study examines current methods of measuring peace and adjacent topics through the lens of Johan Galtung’s violence triangle and his positive and negative peace dichotomy. Through a qualitative approach, this study aims to review whether how peace is measured today applies to a broader framework of peace and, if not, what changes could be made to enhance the portrayal of peace in today’s society. In this research, five measuring systems were examined, evaluated and discussed (the Global Peace Index, the Positive Peace Index, the Freedom in the World Index, the Human Rights Index and the Human Freedom Index). They were all found to be lacking depth and width. This was especially apparent within the peace-focused indices, which, when looked at together with the rest of the systems, does not hinder a larger understanding of peace, but separately it does. All in all, the two indices focused on freedom seem to be the most peace-related based on the framework employed. These findings showcase the need to re-evaluate how peace is measured to ensure that what is perceived as peace and peacefulness accurately portray both.