Congo vs Zimbabwe: CPIA fiscal policy rating
CPIA fiscal policy rating over time
- Congo
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Congo currently reports 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 21 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Congo ahead.
Congo ranks 18th and Zimbabwe ranks 18th of 84 countries.
Congo has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Congo | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.6 1=low to 6=high | 1.2 1=low to 6=high | 1.4 1=low to 6=high | Congo |
| 2010s | 3.25 1=low to 6=high | 2.4 1=low to 6=high | 0.85 1=low to 6=high | Congo |
| 2020s | 3.42 1=low to 6=high | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | 0.3333 1=low to 6=high | Congo |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia fiscal policy rating, Congo or Zimbabwe?
- Congo, at 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in Zimbabwe as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia fiscal policy rating between Congo and Zimbabwe?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Congo ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Zimbabwe?
- 21 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2025.
- How do Congo and Zimbabwe rank globally for cpia fiscal policy rating?
- Congo ranks 18th and Zimbabwe ranks 18th of 84 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA fiscal policy 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). This CPIA fiscal policy criterion assesses the quality of the fiscal policy in its stabilization and allocation functions. The stabilization function deals with achieving macroeconomic policy objectives in conjunction with coherent monetary and exchange rate policies—smoothing business cycle fluctuations, accommodating shocks. The allocation function is concerned with the appropriate provision of public goods. The criterion pays attention to public expenditure composition, including, for example, the provision of public infrastructure and agriculture related public goods and services that support medium-term growth.