Armenia vs High income: CPIA financial sector rating
CPIA financial sector rating over time
- Armenia
- High income
How they compare
Armenia currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in High income, a difference of 0.5 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Armenia's figure about 1.1 times High income's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2005 it was High income ahead.
Armenia ranks 1st and High income ranks 1st of 85 countries.
Armenia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Armenia | High income | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.7 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.2 1=low to 6=high | Armenia |
| 2010s | 3.88 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.375 1=low to 6=high | Armenia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia financial sector rating, Armenia or High income?
- Armenia, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in High income as of 2013.
- What is the difference in cpia financial sector rating between Armenia and High income?
- 0.5 1=low to 6=high, with Armenia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Armenia and High income?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Armenia and High income rank globally for cpia financial sector rating?
- Armenia ranks 1st and High income ranks 1st of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA financial sector 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
The CPIA measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). The financial sector criterion assesses the policies and regulations that affect financial sector development. Three dimensions are covered: (a) financial stability; (b) the sector’s efficiency, depth, and resource mobilization strength; and (c) access to financial services.