CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Moldova
Moldova: CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2019. ▲ Rising
CPIA debt policy rating in Moldova, 2005–2019
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
In 2019, cpia debt policy rating in Moldova stood at 4 1=low to 6=high. That is the highest value across all 15 years on record.
The figure is unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia debt policy rating in Moldova peaked at 4 1=low to 6=high in 2006 and was at its lowest, 3 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.
That places Moldova 14th out of 85 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently rising across the 15 years of available data.
CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Moldova, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +33.3% |
| 2007 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Moldova compared with similar countries
- Moldova's 4 1=low to 6=high is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is 3 1=low to 6=high, 1.3× the median. (21 countries reporting)
- Moldova's 4 1=low to 6=high is below the median for Europe & Central Asia, which is 4.5 1=low to 6=high, 89% of the median. (9 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.8 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
Countries ranked near Moldova
- 14 Armenia 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Bangladesh 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Benin 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Bhutan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Bosnia and Herzegovina 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Fiji 4 1=low to 6=high
- 14 Honduras 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 India 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Mali 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Nepal 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Nigeria 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Samoa 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Tanzania 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Togo 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 14 Uganda 4 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Moldova
- Democracy, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Chief executive of the government is elected, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Elected parliament, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Men's universal right to vote, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Universal right to vote, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Universal right to vote in practice, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Arms imports 5.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2025)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 46.09 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0061 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 17.34 % change on previous year (2024)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia debt policy rating in Moldova?
- Cpia debt policy rating in Moldova was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2019, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia debt policy rating recorded in Moldova?
- The highest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2006.
- What is the lowest cpia debt policy rating recorded in Moldova?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- How does Moldova rank for cpia debt policy rating?
- Moldova ranks 14th out of 85 countries with data for 2019.
- Is cpia debt policy rating rising or falling in Moldova?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Moldova data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 15 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
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 Debt Policy and Management criterion assesses whether the country’s debt management strategy is conducive to ensure medium-term debt sustainability and minimize budgetary risks. The criterion covers: (a) the extent to which external and domestic debt is contracted with a view to achieving/maintaining debt sustainability; and (b) the effectiveness of debt management functions (including the degree of coordination between debt management and other macroeconomic policies, the effectiveness of the debt management unit, and the existence of a debt management strategy and of a legal framework for borrowing).