Bolivia, Plurinational State of vs Lesotho: CPIA financial sector rating
CPIA financial sector rating over time
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of
- Lesotho
How they compare
Bolivia, Plurinational State of currently reports 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Lesotho, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Lesotho ahead.
Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 27th and Lesotho ranks 27th of 84 countries.
Bolivia, Plurinational State of has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bolivia, Plurinational State of | Lesotho | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.7 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.2 1=low to 6=high | Bolivia, Plurinational State of |
| 2010s | 3.25 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 0.25 1=low to 6=high | Bolivia, Plurinational State of |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia financial sector rating, Bolivia, Plurinational State of or Lesotho?
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of, at 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Lesotho as of 2015.
- What is the difference in cpia financial sector rating between Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Lesotho?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Bolivia, Plurinational State of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Lesotho?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2015.
- How do Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Lesotho rank globally for cpia financial sector rating?
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 27th and Lesotho ranks 27th of 84 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.