Myanmar vs Sao Tome and Principe: CPIA equity of public resource use rating
Myanmar
3 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Sao Tome and Principe
3 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Myanmar rank
55th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
55th
CPIA equity of public resource use rating over time
- Myanmar
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Myanmar currently reports 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
Across all 13 years both countries report, Sao Tome and Principe has been ahead every year.
Myanmar ranks 55th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 55th of 85 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Myanmar | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 0.5 1=low to 6=high | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2020s | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 0 1=low to 6=high | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia equity of public resource use rating, Myanmar or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Myanmar, at 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia equity of public resource use rating between Myanmar and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Myanmar ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Myanmar and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2025.
- How do Myanmar and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for cpia equity of public resource use rating?
- Myanmar ranks 55th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 55th 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.