Burundi vs Congo, Democratic Republic of the: IDA resource allocation index

Burundi
3.12 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Congo, Democratic Republic of the
3.18 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Burundi rank
51st
Congo, Democratic Republic of the rank
49th

IDA resource allocation index over time

  • Burundi
  • Congo, Democratic Republic of the
0123200520152025

How they compare

Congo, Democratic Republic of the currently reports 3.18 1=low to 6=high against 3.12 1=low to 6=high in Burundi, a difference of 0.06 1=low to 6=high.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 21 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Burundi ahead.

Burundi ranks 51st and Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 49th of 84 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Burundi averaged higher in 2 and Congo, Democratic Republic of the in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Burundi Congo, Democratic Republic of the Difference Ahead
2000s 3.01 1=low to 6=high 2.78 1=low to 6=high 0.2283 1=low to 6=high Burundi
2010s 3.07 1=low to 6=high 2.85 1=low to 6=high 0.2175 1=low to 6=high Burundi
2020s 3.02 1=low to 6=high 3.1 1=low to 6=high 0.0778 1=low to 6=high Congo, Democratic Republic of the

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher ida resource allocation index, Burundi or Congo, Democratic Republic of the?
Congo, Democratic Republic of the, at 3.18 1=low to 6=high against 3.12 1=low to 6=high in Burundi as of 2025.
What is the difference in ida resource allocation index between Burundi and Congo, Democratic Republic of the?
0.06 1=low to 6=high, with Congo, Democratic Republic of the ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Burundi and Congo, Democratic Republic of the?
21 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2025.
How do Burundi and Congo, Democratic Republic of the rank globally for ida resource allocation index?
Burundi ranks 51st and Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 49th of 84 countries.
Where does this data come from?
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as IDA resource allocation index (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

Burundi vs Congo, Democratic Republic of the: IDA resource allocation index. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 24 August 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/ida-resource-allocation-index-1-low-to-6-high/burundi/congo-dem-rep/

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/ida-resource-allocation-index-1-low-to-6-high/burundi/congo-dem-rep/">Burundi vs Congo, Democratic Republic of the: IDA resource allocation index</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
IDA resource allocation index (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 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 (the IDA resource allocation index) 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).