A lot of people follow @tomaspueyo because his Medium article went viral. But I think the points he made on Sweden today are not accurate (that Sweden derived no economic benefit from its different path). Hence, some data below, so you can make your own judgement...
First, Sweden's different model does seem to have implied a fairly different impact than on other European economies on various indicators. Industrial production is the most extreme example, Sweden was flat (other European countries collapsing). 
Another indicator, which is less influenced by exports (where Sweden is suffering for global reasons) is the services PMI. It has dropped a lot less in Sweden than in many other economies (smaller cross-section here, due to limited data availability).
On the Swedish stock market. It is always hard to compare different countries, because they have different sector weightings (Denmark has a lot of pharma companies for example). So perhaps better to look at one sector. Banks is the easiest one, since all countries have banks:
I try to look at data holistically; and when looking a lot of different indicators, it seems like the different approach Sweden has taken, has made an economic difference (albeit with a cost in terms of spread). Look at the charts, and make up your mind. I will leave it at that.
