Eritrea vs Sudan: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating

Eritrea
1 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Sudan
1 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Eritrea rank
82nd
Sudan rank
82nd

CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating over time

  • Eritrea
  • Sudan
00.511.522.5200520152025

How they compare

Eritrea currently reports 1 1=low to 6=high against 1 1=low to 6=high in Sudan, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 21 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Sudan ahead.

Eritrea ranks 82nd and Sudan ranks 82nd of 85 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Eritrea averaged higher in 1 and Sudan in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eritrea Sudan Difference Ahead
2000s 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2.1 1=low to 6=high 0.4 1=low to 6=high Eritrea
2010s 2.05 1=low to 6=high 2.45 1=low to 6=high 0.4 1=low to 6=high Sudan
2020s 1.25 1=low to 6=high 1.92 1=low to 6=high 0.6667 1=low to 6=high Sudan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating, Eritrea or Sudan?
Eritrea, at 1 1=low to 6=high against 1 1=low to 6=high in Sudan as of 2025.
What is the difference in cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating between Eritrea and Sudan?
0 1=low to 6=high, with Eritrea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Eritrea and Sudan?
21 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2025.
How do Eritrea and Sudan rank globally for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
Eritrea ranks 82nd and Sudan ranks 82nd of 85 countries.
Where does this data come from?
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management 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

Eritrea vs Sudan: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 14 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-quality-of-budgetary-and-financial-management-rating-1-low-to-6-high/eritrea/sudan/

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-quality-of-budgetary-and-financial-management-rating-1-low-to-6-high/eritrea/sudan/">Eritrea vs Sudan: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management 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
127 places, 2,460 data points, 2005–2025
Last refreshed

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 quality of budgetary and financial management criterion assesses the extent to which there is: (a) a comprehensive and credible budget, linked to policy priorities; (b) effective financial management systems to ensure that the budget is implemented as intended in a controlled and predictable way; and (c) timely and accurate accounting and fiscal reporting, including timely audit of public accounts and effective arrangements for follow up.