Latvia vs Malaysia: Getting electricity: System average interruption frequency index (SAIF
Latvia
0.42 DB16-20 methodology
in 2019
Malaysia
0.49 DB16-20 methodology
in 2019
Latvia rank
93rd
Malaysia rank
91st
Getting electricity: System average interruption frequency index (SAIF over time
- Latvia
- Malaysia
How they compare
Malaysia currently reports 0.49 DB16-20 methodology against 0.42 DB16-20 methodology in Latvia, a difference of 0.07 DB16-20 methodology.
That makes Malaysia's figure about 1.2 times Latvia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Latvia ahead.
Latvia ranks 93rd and Malaysia ranks 91st of 124 countries.
Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting electricity: system average interruption frequency index (saif, Latvia or Malaysia?
- Malaysia, at 0.49 DB16-20 methodology against 0.42 DB16-20 methodology in Latvia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting electricity: system average interruption frequency index (saif between Latvia and Malaysia?
- 0.07 DB16-20 methodology, with Malaysia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Malaysia?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Latvia and Malaysia rank globally for getting electricity: system average interruption frequency index (saif?
- Latvia ranks 93rd and Malaysia ranks 91st of 124 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting electricity: System average interruption frequency index (SAIFI) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The system average interruption frequency index (SAIFI) is the average number of service interruptions experienced by a customer in a year. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.