Comoros vs Sao Tome and Principe: Control of Corruption
Control of Corruption over time
- Comoros
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Comoros currently reports 0.2785 standard error against 0.2293 standard error in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.0492 standard error.
That makes Comoros's figure about 1.2 times Sao Tome and Principe's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Comoros ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 4th of 53 countries.
Comoros has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Comoros | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.4509 standard error | 0.4509 standard error | 0 standard error | — |
| 2000s | 0.2836 standard error | 0.2702 standard error | 0.0134 standard error | Comoros |
| 2010s | 0.2806 standard error | 0.2299 standard error | 0.0507 standard error | Comoros |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher control of corruption, Comoros or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Comoros, at 0.2785 standard error against 0.2293 standard error in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2011.
- What is the difference in control of corruption between Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0.0492 standard error, with Comoros ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for control of corruption?
- Comoros ranks 1st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 4th of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank Institute, published as Control of Corruption (standard error). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
See definition GV.CONT.CO.ES. Inherent to all Governance Indicators is a margin of error, which might vary from country to country, normally attributable to two factors: (i) cross-country differences in the number of sources in which a country appears, and (ii) differences in the precision of the sources in which each country appears.