Azerbaijan vs Kyrgyzstan: CPIA equity of public resource use rating
Azerbaijan
4 1=low to 6=high
in 2010
Kyrgyzstan
4 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Azerbaijan rank
13th
Kyrgyzstan rank
13th
CPIA equity of public resource use rating over time
- Azerbaijan
- Kyrgyzstan
How they compare
Azerbaijan currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Kyrgyzstan, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Kyrgyzstan ahead.
Azerbaijan ranks 13th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 13th of 85 countries.
Azerbaijan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Azerbaijan | Kyrgyzstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.9 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.4 1=low to 6=high | Azerbaijan |
| 2010s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.5 1=low to 6=high | Azerbaijan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia equity of public resource use rating, Azerbaijan or Kyrgyzstan?
- Azerbaijan, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Kyrgyzstan as of 2010.
- What is the difference in cpia equity of public resource use rating between Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Azerbaijan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2010.
- How do Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan rank globally for cpia equity of public resource use rating?
- Azerbaijan ranks 13th and Kyrgyzstan ranks 13th of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA equity of public resource use rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Equity of public resource use assesses the extent to which the pattern of public expenditures and revenue collection affects the poor and is consistent with national poverty reduction priorities.