Bangladesh vs Suriname: Financial Institutions Efficiency Index
Financial Institutions Efficiency Index over time
- Bangladesh
- Suriname
How they compare
Suriname currently reports 0.6773 against 0.6716 in Bangladesh, a difference of 0.0057.
The two have swapped places 13 times across 41 shared years of data; in 1980 it was Bangladesh ahead.
Bangladesh ranks 35th and Suriname ranks 34th of 183 countries.
Across the 5 decades both report, Bangladesh averaged higher in 4 and Suriname in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bangladesh | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0.6895 | 0.6654 | 0.0241 | Bangladesh |
| 1990s | 0.5747 | 0.4583 | 0.1164 | Bangladesh |
| 2000s | 0.559 | 0.5149 | 0.0441 | Bangladesh |
| 2010s | 0.6469 | 0.6321 | 0.0148 | Bangladesh |
| 2020s | 0.6716 | 0.6773 | 0.0058 | Suriname |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher financial institutions efficiency index, Bangladesh or Suriname?
- Suriname, at 0.6773 against 0.6716 in Bangladesh as of 2020.
- What is the difference in financial institutions efficiency index between Bangladesh and Suriname?
- 0.0057, with Suriname ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bangladesh and Suriname?
- 41 years are reported by both, from 1980 to 2020.
- How do Bangladesh and Suriname rank globally for financial institutions efficiency index?
- Bangladesh ranks 35th and Suriname ranks 34th of 183 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Financial Institutions Efficiency Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The dataset contains nine indices that summarize how developed financial institutions and financial markets are in terms of their depth, access, and efficiency. These indices are aggregated into an overall index of financial development. With the coverage of over 180 countries on annual frequency from 1980 onwards, the database should offer a useful analytical tool for researchers and policy makers.