CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka, 2005–2025
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
Sri Lanka recorded 4 1=low to 6=high for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in 2025. That is the highest value across all 16 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka peaked at 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005 and was at its lowest, 4 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.
Sri Lanka ranks 6th of 85 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 4 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 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% |
| 2019 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2022 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2024 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Sri Lanka compared with similar countries
- Sri Lanka's 4 1=low to 6=high is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 1.1× the median. (21 countries reporting)
- Sri Lanka's 4 1=low to 6=high is above the median for South Asia, which is 3.25 1=low to 6=high, 1.2× the median. (6 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 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 | 7 |
| 2020s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 |
Countries ranked near Sri Lanka
- 6 Benin 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Côte d'Ivoire 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Ethiopia 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Gambia 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Mauritania 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Republic of Moldova 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Pakistan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Rwanda 4 1=low to 6=high compare
- 6 Uzbekistan 4 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Sri Lanka
- Arms imports 9.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 0.4107 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0.0001 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), annual growth rate 80 % change on previous year (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 9.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 60.84 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0134 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 14.37 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 1.33 billion current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 80.83 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka?
- Cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sri Lanka was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating recorded in Sri Lanka?
- The highest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- What is the lowest cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating recorded in Sri Lanka?
- The lowest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- How does Sri Lanka rank for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
- Sri Lanka ranks 6th out of 85 countries with data for 2025.
- Is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating rising or falling in Sri Lanka?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Sri Lanka data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 16 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
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.