South Sudan vs Sudan: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating over time
- South Sudan
- Sudan
How they compare
South Sudan 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.
Across all 14 years both countries report, Sudan has been ahead every year.
South Sudan ranks 82nd and Sudan ranks 82nd of 85 countries.
Sudan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | South Sudan | Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1.44 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 1.06 1=low to 6=high | Sudan |
| 2020s | 1 1=low to 6=high | 1.92 1=low to 6=high | 0.9167 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, South Sudan or Sudan?
- South Sudan, 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 South Sudan and Sudan?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with South Sudan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for South Sudan and Sudan?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2025.
- How do South Sudan and Sudan rank globally for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
- South Sudan 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
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 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.