Congo vs Mongolia: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating

Congo
3 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Mongolia
3 1=low to 6=high
in 2019
Congo rank
31st
Mongolia rank
31st

CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating over time

  • Congo
  • Mongolia
01234200520152025

How they compare

Congo currently reports 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Mongolia, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.

Across all 15 years both countries report, Mongolia has been ahead every year.

Congo ranks 31st and Mongolia ranks 31st of 84 countries.

Mongolia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Congo Mongolia Difference Ahead
2000s 2.4 1=low to 6=high 3 1=low to 6=high 0.6 1=low to 6=high Mongolia
2010s 2.5 1=low to 6=high 3.05 1=low to 6=high 0.55 1=low to 6=high Mongolia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating, Congo or Mongolia?
Congo, at 3 1=low to 6=high against 3 1=low to 6=high in Mongolia as of 2025.
What is the difference in cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating between Congo and Mongolia?
0 1=low to 6=high, with Congo ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Mongolia?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Congo and Mongolia rank globally for cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating?
Congo ranks 31st and Mongolia ranks 31st of 84 countries.
Where does this data come from?
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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

Congo vs Mongolia: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 29 August 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-property-rights-and-rule-based-governance-rating-1-low-to-6-high/congo-rep/mongolia/

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-property-rights-and-rule-based-governance-rating-1-low-to-6-high/congo-rep/mongolia/">Congo vs Mongolia: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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

The Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (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 Property Rights and Rule-Based Governance criterion assesses the extent to which economic activity is facilitated by an effective legal system and rule-based governance structure in which property and contract rights are reliably respected and enforced. It encompasses three dimensions: (a) legal framework for secure property and contract rights, including predictability and impartiality of laws and regulations; (b) quality of the legal and judicial system, as measured by independence, accessibility, legitimacy, efficiency, transparency, and integrity of the courts and other relevant dispute resolution mechanisms; and (c) crime and violence as an impediment to economic activity and citizen security.