Kiribati vs Monaco: Political Stability - Governance score
Political Stability - Governance score over time
- Kiribati
- Monaco
How they compare
Monaco currently reports 87.05 0-100 against 87.04 0-100 in Kiribati, a difference of 0.01 0-100.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 22 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Monaco ahead.
Kiribati ranks 17th and Monaco ranks 14th of 206 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Kiribati averaged higher in 2 and Monaco in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kiribati | Monaco | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 87.01 0-100 | 81.92 0-100 | 5.09 0-100 | Kiribati |
| 2010s | 87.04 0-100 | 85.91 0-100 | 1.13 0-100 | Kiribati |
| 2020s | 86.61 0-100 | 87.78 0-100 | 1.17 0-100 | Monaco |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher political stability - governance score, Kiribati or Monaco?
- Monaco, at 87.05 0-100 against 87.04 0-100 in Kiribati as of 2024.
- What is the difference in political stability - governance score between Kiribati and Monaco?
- 0.01 0-100, with Monaco ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kiribati and Monaco?
- 22 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2024.
- How do Kiribati and Monaco rank globally for political stability - governance score?
- Kiribati ranks 17th and Monaco ranks 14th of 206 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 Political Stability - Governance score (0-100). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Political Stability (PV) captures perceptions of the extent to which political power and governance are secure from destabilization, and of the likelihood that authority will be challenged or altered through violent, coercive, or unconstitutional means. 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).