Statizoid

CPIA macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income

Upper middle income: CPIA macroeconomic management rating was 3.56 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling

Latest (2025)
3.56 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
down 0.9%
Rank
14th
of 42 groups
All-time high
4.18 1=low to 6=high
in 2006
All-time low
3.5 1=low to 6=high
in 2016
Years of data
21
2005–2025

CPIA macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income, 2005–2025

012342005201520252005: 4.1 1=low to 6=high2006: 4.2 1=low to 6=high2007: 4 1=low to 6=high2008: 3.8 1=low to 6=high2009: 3.8 1=low to 6=high2010: 3.8 1=low to 6=high2011: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2012: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2013: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2014: 3.6 1=low to 6=high2015: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2016: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2017: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2018: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2019: 3.8 1=low to 6=high2020: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2021: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2022: 3.6 1=low to 6=high2023: 3.6 1=low to 6=high2024: 3.6 1=low to 6=high2025: 3.6 1=low to 6=high

Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.

Analysis

Upper middle income recorded 3.56 1=low to 6=high for cpia macroeconomic management rating in 2025.

That represents a change of down 0.9% on the previous year and up 0.9% over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income peaked at 4.18 1=low to 6=high in 2006 and was at its lowest, 3.5 1=low to 6=high, in 2016.

Upper middle income ranks 14th of 42 groups on this measure, in the middle of the range.

The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 21 years of available data.

CPIA macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income, year by year

Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2005 4.13 1=low to 6=high —
2006 4.18 1=low to 6=high +1.3%
2007 4 1=low to 6=high -4.4%
2008 3.84 1=low to 6=high -3.9%
2009 3.82 1=low to 6=high -0.5%
2010 3.76 1=low to 6=high -1.5%
2011 3.69 1=low to 6=high -1.9%
2012 3.71 1=low to 6=high +0.4%
2013 3.68 1=low to 6=high -0.7%
2014 3.56 1=low to 6=high -3.3%
2015 3.53 1=low to 6=high -0.9%
2016 3.5 1=low to 6=high -0.9%
2017 3.54 1=low to 6=high +1.0%
2018 3.54 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2019 3.83 1=low to 6=high +8.4%
2020 3.73 1=low to 6=high -2.7%
2021 3.73 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2022 3.61 1=low to 6=high -3.3%
2023 3.61 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2024 3.59 1=low to 6=high -0.4%
2025 3.56 1=low to 6=high -0.9%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 4 1=low to 6=high 3.82 1=low to 6=high 4.18 1=low to 6=high 5
2010s 3.64 1=low to 6=high 3.5 1=low to 6=high 3.83 1=low to 6=high 10
2020s 3.64 1=low to 6=high 3.56 1=low to 6=high 3.73 1=low to 6=high 6

Countries ranked near Upper middle income

  1. 13 Azerbaijan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  2. 13 Benin 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 13 Bosnia and Herzegovina 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  4. 13 Burkina Faso 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  5. 13 Cape Verde 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 13 Cambodia 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 13 Democratic Republic of Congo 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 13 Cote d'Ivoire 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 13 Dominica 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  10. 13 Guinea 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  11. 13 Guinea-Bissau 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  12. 13 Guyana 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  13. 13 Kyrgyzstan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  14. 13 Madagascar 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  15. 13 Mali 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  16. 13 Nicaragua 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  17. 13 Niger 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  18. 13 Rwanda 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  19. 13 Senegal 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  20. 13 Tajikistan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  21. 13 Togo 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  22. 13 Uganda 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  23. 13 Uzbekistan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  24. 13 Vanuatu 4 1=low to 6=high compare
  25. 13 Vietnam 4 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 126 places →

More public sector data for Upper middle income

All data for Upper middle income →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income?
Cpia macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income was 3.56 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia macroeconomic management rating recorded in Upper middle income?
The highest recorded value was 4.18 1=low to 6=high in 2006.
What is the lowest cpia macroeconomic management rating recorded in Upper middle income?
The lowest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2016.
How does Upper middle income rank for cpia macroeconomic management rating?
Upper middle income ranks 14th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
Is cpia macroeconomic management rating rising or falling in Upper middle income?
Over the last ten years it is up 0.9%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
Where does this Upper middle income data come from?
The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA macroeconomic management rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 21 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 28 August 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-macroeconomic-management-rating-1-low-to-6-high/upper-middle-income/

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/stat/cpia-macroeconomic-management-rating-1-low-to-6-high/upper-middle-income/">CPIA macroeconomic management rating in Upper middle income</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA macroeconomic 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
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 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 CPIA macroeconomic management cluster assesses the monetary, exchange rate, and fiscal policy, as well as debt policy and management.