Angola vs Malawi: Control of Corruption - Governance score
Control of Corruption - Governance score over time
- Angola
- Malawi
How they compare
Angola currently reports 35.25 0-100 against 34.72 0-100 in Malawi, a difference of 0.53 0-100.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 26 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Malawi ahead.
Angola ranks 143rd and Malawi ranks 145th of 205 countries.
Malawi has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Angola | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 23.64 0-100 | 39.47 0-100 | 15.83 0-100 | Malawi |
| 2000s | 21.89 0-100 | 33.4 0-100 | 11.51 0-100 | Malawi |
| 2010s | 20.28 0-100 | 34.21 0-100 | 13.94 0-100 | Malawi |
| 2020s | 34.16 0-100 | 36.35 0-100 | 2.2 0-100 | Malawi |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher control of corruption - governance score, Angola or Malawi?
- Angola, at 35.25 0-100 against 34.72 0-100 in Malawi as of 2024.
- What is the difference in control of corruption - governance score between Angola and Malawi?
- 0.53 0-100, with Angola ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Malawi?
- 26 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2024.
- How do Angola and Malawi rank globally for control of corruption - governance score?
- Angola ranks 143rd and Malawi ranks 145th of 205 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 score (0-100). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
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 score is a linear transformation of the governance estimate using hypothetical worst-case and base-case countries. It is an absolute score ranging from 0-100. Larger values correspond to better governance. The (country-series-time) metadata include the (a) number of sources, and (b) confidence intervals (lower and upper bound). The number of sources indicates the number of underlying data sources on which the governance score (respectively the underlying governance estimate) is based. The confidence intervals include the lower and upper bound of the 90% confidence interval for the governance score. Confidence intervals are a statistical range of values that likely contain the true value (of what is being estimated).