Argentina vs Maldives: Regulatory Quality - Governance score
Regulatory Quality - Governance score over time
- Argentina
- Maldives
How they compare
Argentina currently reports 51.16 0-100 against 51.15 0-100 in Maldives, a difference of 0.01 0-100.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Maldives ahead.
Argentina ranks 114th and Maldives ranks 115th of 204 countries.
Maldives has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Argentina | Maldives | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 59.44 0-100 | 69.06 0-100 | 9.61 0-100 | Maldives |
| 2000s | 44.51 0-100 | 58.49 0-100 | 13.97 0-100 | Maldives |
| 2010s | 45.46 0-100 | 51.04 0-100 | 5.58 0-100 | Maldives |
| 2020s | 47.13 0-100 | 49.98 0-100 | 2.85 0-100 | Maldives |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher regulatory quality - governance score, Argentina or Maldives?
- Argentina, at 51.16 0-100 against 51.15 0-100 in Maldives as of 2024.
- What is the difference in regulatory quality - governance score between Argentina and Maldives?
- 0.01 0-100, with Argentina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Argentina and Maldives?
- 26 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2024.
- How do Argentina and Maldives rank globally for regulatory quality - governance score?
- Argentina ranks 114th and Maldives ranks 115th 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 Regulatory Quality - Governance score (0-100). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Regulatory Quality (RQ) captures perceptions of the government’s ability to design and implement policies and regulations that promote private sector development. 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).