Cyprus vs Philippines: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score

Cyprus
3
in 2018
Philippines
3
in 2018
Cyprus rank
1st
Philippines rank
1st

Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Cyprus
  • Philippines
11.522.53193519762018

How they compare

Cyprus currently reports 3 against 3 in Philippines, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 52 shared years of data; in 1960 it was Philippines ahead.

Cyprus ranks 1st and Philippines ranks 1st of 166 countries.

Cyprus has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cyprus Philippines Difference Ahead
1960s 3 3 0 β€”
1970s 3 1.44 1.56 Cyprus
1980s 3 1.67 1.33 Cyprus
1990s 3 3 0 β€”
2000s 3 3 0 β€”
2010s 3 3 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Cyprus or Philippines?
Cyprus, at 3 against 3 in Philippines as of 2018.
What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Cyprus and Philippines?
0, with Cyprus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cyprus and Philippines?
52 years are reported by both, from 1960 to 2018.
How do Cyprus and Philippines rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
Cyprus ranks 1st and Philippines ranks 1st of 166 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Source
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
167 places, 17,813 data points, 1789–2020
Last refreshed

Indicates the extent to which executive recruitment is competitive. It ranges from executive power being seized (score of 0), over the executive being selected by elites (score of 1), and dual selection-election or transitional arrangements (score of 2), to the executive being elected (score of 4).