Comoros vs Solomon Islands: Getting electricity: Cost to get electricity (% of income per capita)
Comoros
85.0%
in 2019
Solomon Islands
85.1%
in 2019
Comoros rank
150th
Solomon Islands rank
149th
Getting electricity: Cost to get electricity (% of income per capita) over time
- Comoros
- Solomon Islands
How they compare
Solomon Islands currently reports 85.1% against 85.0% in Comoros, a difference of 0.1%.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2009 it was Solomon Islands ahead.
Comoros ranks 150th and Solomon Islands ranks 149th of 191 countries.
Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Comoros | Solomon Islands | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 68.2% | 75.9% | 7.7% | Solomon Islands |
| 2010s | 73.5% | 79.1% | 5.7% | Solomon Islands |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting electricity: cost to get electricity (% of income per capita), Comoros or Solomon Islands?
- Solomon Islands, at 85.1% against 85.0% in Comoros as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting electricity: cost to get electricity (% of income per capita) between Comoros and Solomon Islands?
- 0.1%, with Solomon Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Solomon Islands?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2019.
- How do Comoros and Solomon Islands rank globally for getting electricity: cost to get electricity (% of income per capita)?
- Comoros ranks 150th and Solomon Islands ranks 149th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting electricity: Cost to get electricity (% of income per capita) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for cost benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.