Equatorial Guinea vs Rwanda: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Equatorial Guinea
0
in 2018
Rwanda
0
in 2018
Equatorial Guinea rank
150th
Rwanda rank
150th
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Rwanda
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 0 against 0 in Rwanda, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 51 shared years of data; in 1968 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 150th and Rwanda ranks 150th of 166 countries.
Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Rwanda | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | Rwanda |
| 1980s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Equatorial Guinea or Rwanda?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 0 against 0 in Rwanda as of 2018.
- What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda?
- 0, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda?
- 51 years are reported by both, from 1968 to 2018.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 150th and Rwanda ranks 150th 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
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).