Republic of Moldova vs Mozambique: CPIA financial sector rating
CPIA financial sector rating over time
- Republic of Moldova
- Mozambique
How they compare
Republic of Moldova currently reports 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Mozambique, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Republic of Moldova ahead.
Republic of Moldova ranks 53rd and Mozambique ranks 53rd of 84 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Republic of Moldova averaged higher in 1 and Mozambique in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Republic of Moldova | Mozambique | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.2 1=low to 6=high | 0.3 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
| 2010s | 2.95 1=low to 6=high | 3.3 1=low to 6=high | 0.35 1=low to 6=high | Mozambique |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia financial sector rating, Republic of Moldova or Mozambique?
- Republic of Moldova, at 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Mozambique as of 2019.
- What is the difference in cpia financial sector rating between Republic of Moldova and Mozambique?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Republic of Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Republic of Moldova and Mozambique?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Republic of Moldova and Mozambique rank globally for cpia financial sector rating?
- Republic of Moldova ranks 53rd and Mozambique ranks 53rd 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.