Equatorial Guinea vs Somalia: Control of Corruption
Control of Corruption over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Somalia
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 0.2293 standard error against 0.206 standard error in Somalia, a difference of 0.0233 standard error.
That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 1.1 times Somalia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Somalia ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 4th and Somalia ranks 7th of 53 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Somalia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Somalia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.2574 standard error | 0.419 standard error | 0.1617 standard error | Somalia |
| 2000s | 0.2308 standard error | 0.2769 standard error | 0.0461 standard error | Somalia |
| 2010s | 0.2299 standard error | 0.2112 standard error | 0.0187 standard error | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher control of corruption, Equatorial Guinea or Somalia?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 0.2293 standard error against 0.206 standard error in Somalia as of 2011.
- What is the difference in control of corruption between Equatorial Guinea and Somalia?
- 0.0233 standard error, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Somalia?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Somalia rank globally for control of corruption?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 4th and Somalia ranks 7th 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.