Which has higher cpia financial sector rating, Mongolia or Tuvalu?

Mongolia, at 2 1=low to 6=high against 2 1=low to 6=high in Tuvalu as of 2019.

What is the difference in cpia financial sector rating between Mongolia and Tuvalu?

0 1=low to 6=high, with Mongolia ahead.

How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Tuvalu?

8 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2019.

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.

Mongolia vs Tuvalu: CPIA financial sector rating

Mongolia

2 1=low to 6=high

in 2019

Tuvalu

2 1=low to 6=high

in 2025

Mongolia rank

68th

Tuvalu rank

68th

CPIA financial sector rating over time

Mongolia
Tuvalu

How they compare

Mongolia currently reports 2 1=low to 6=high against 2 1=low to 6=high in Tuvalu, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.

Across all 8 years both countries report, Tuvalu has been ahead every year.

Mongolia ranks 68th and Tuvalu ranks 68th of 84 countries.

Tuvalu has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cpia financial sector rating, Mongolia or Tuvalu?: Mongolia, at 2 1=low to 6=high against 2 1=low to 6=high in Tuvalu as of 2019.
What is the difference in cpia financial sector rating between Mongolia and Tuvalu?: 0 1=low to 6=high, with Mongolia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Tuvalu?: 8 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2019.
How do Mongolia and Tuvalu rank globally for cpia financial sector rating?: Mongolia ranks 68th and Tuvalu ranks 68th 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

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Mongolia vs Tuvalu: CPIA financial sector rating. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 28 August 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-financial-sector-rating-1-low-to-6-high/mongolia/tuvalu/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-financial-sector-rating-1-low-to-6-high/mongolia/tuvalu/">Mongolia vs Tuvalu: CPIA financial sector rating</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: CPIA financial sector rating (1=low to 6=high)
Unit: 1=low to 6=high
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage: 126 places, 2,443 data points, 2005–2025
Last refreshed: 20 August 2026

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.