Egypt vs Indonesia: Statistical performance: Pillar 5 data infrastructure score
Statistical performance: Pillar 5 data infrastructure score over time
- Egypt
- Indonesia
How they compare
Egypt currently reports 75 scale 0-100 against 75 scale 0-100 in Indonesia, a difference of 0 scale 0-100.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2016 it was Egypt ahead.
Egypt ranks 70th and Indonesia ranks 70th of 192 countries.
Egypt has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Egypt | Indonesia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 60 scale 0-100 | 53.75 scale 0-100 | 6.25 scale 0-100 | Egypt |
| 2020s | 70 scale 0-100 | 64 scale 0-100 | 6 scale 0-100 | Egypt |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data, Egypt or Indonesia?
- Egypt, at 75 scale 0-100 against 75 scale 0-100 in Indonesia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data between Egypt and Indonesia?
- 0 scale 0-100, with Egypt ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Egypt and Indonesia?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2024.
- How do Egypt and Indonesia rank globally for statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data?
- Egypt ranks 70th and Indonesia ranks 70th of 192 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statistical Performance Indicators, World Bank (WB), published as Statistical performance indicators (SPI): Pillar 5 data infrastructure score (scale 0-100). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The data infrastructure pillar overall score measures the hard and soft infrastructure segments, itemizing essential cross cutting requirements for an effective statistical system. The segments are: (i) legislation and governance covering the existence of laws and a functioning institutional framework for the statistical system; (ii) standards and methods addressing compliance with recognized frameworks and concepts; (iii) skills including level of skills within the statistical system and among users (statistical literacy); (iv) partnerships reflecting the need for the statistical system to be inclusive and coherent; and (v) finance mobilized both domestically and from donors.