Rwanda vs Tuvalu: Control of Corruption - Governance estimate

Rwanda
0.6255 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2024
Tuvalu
0.5787 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2024
Rwanda rank
56th
Tuvalu rank
58th

Control of Corruption - Governance estimate over time

  • Rwanda
  • Tuvalu
-1-0.500.5199620102024

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 0.6255 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against 0.5787 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Tuvalu, a difference of 0.0468 approx. -2.5 to +2.5.

That makes Rwanda's figure about 1.1 times Tuvalu's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 21 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Tuvalu ahead.

Rwanda ranks 56th and Tuvalu ranks 58th of 204 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Rwanda averaged higher in 2 and Tuvalu in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Rwanda Tuvalu Difference Ahead
2000s -0.1655 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.0447 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2101 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Tuvalu
2010s 0.4392 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -0.0488 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.4879 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Rwanda
2020s 0.5635 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2949 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2686 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher control of corruption - governance estimate, Rwanda or Tuvalu?
Rwanda, at 0.6255 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against 0.5787 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Tuvalu as of 2024.
What is the difference in control of corruption - governance estimate between Rwanda and Tuvalu?
0.0468 approx. -2.5 to +2.5, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Tuvalu?
21 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2024.
How do Rwanda and Tuvalu rank globally for control of corruption - governance estimate?
Rwanda ranks 56th and Tuvalu ranks 58th of 204 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG), published as Control of Corruption - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Rwanda vs Tuvalu: Control of Corruption - Governance estimate. Statizoid, drawing on The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 17 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/control-of-corruption-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/rwanda/tuvalu/

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://reference.statizoid.com/compare/control-of-corruption-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/rwanda/tuvalu/">Rwanda vs Tuvalu: Control of Corruption - Governance estimate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Control of Corruption - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5)
Unit
approx. -2.5 to +2.5
Source
The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
204 places, 5,167 data points, 1996–2024
Last refreshed

Control of Corruption (CC) captures perceptions of the extent to which public power is used for private gain, including both petty and grand corruption, as well as capture of the state by elites and private interests. Governance estimate from the aggregation model, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5. Larger values correspond to better governance. The (country-series-time) metadata include the (a) number of sources, and (b) standard error. The number of sources indicates the number of underlying data sources on which the governance estimate is based. The standard error indicates the precision of the governance estimate. Larger values indicate less precise estimates. A 90% confidence interval for the governance estimate is given by the estimate +/- 1.64 times the standard error.