Antigua and Barbuda vs Chile: Getting electricity: Time (days) - Score

Antigua and Barbuda
89.57
in 2019
Chile
89.13
in 2019
Antigua and Barbuda rank
38th
Chile rank
41st

Getting electricity: Time (days) - Score over time

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Chile
020406080200920142019

How they compare

Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 89.57 against 89.13 in Chile, a difference of 0.44.

Across all 11 years both countries report, Antigua and Barbuda has been ahead every year.

Antigua and Barbuda ranks 38th and Chile ranks 41st of 188 countries.

Antigua and Barbuda has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Antigua and Barbuda Chile Difference Ahead
2000s 89.57 89.13 0.4348 Antigua and Barbuda
2010s 89.57 89.13 0.4348 Antigua and Barbuda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher getting electricity: time (days) - score, Antigua and Barbuda or Chile?
Antigua and Barbuda, at 89.57 against 89.13 in Chile as of 2019.
What is the difference in getting electricity: time (days) - score between Antigua and Barbuda and Chile?
0.44, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Chile?
11 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2019.
How do Antigua and Barbuda and Chile rank globally for getting electricity: time (days) - score?
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 38th and Chile ranks 41st of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Getting electricity: Time (days) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Getting electricity: Time (days) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 2,068 data points, 2009–2019
Last refreshed

The score for time 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.