Congo vs Mozambique: Gross public investment
Gross public investment over time
- Congo
- Mozambique
How they compare
Congo currently reports 15.9% against 13.6% in Mozambique, a difference of 2.3%.
That makes Congo's figure about 1.2 times Mozambique's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 27 shared years of data; in 1985 it was Congo ahead.
Congo ranks 6th and Mozambique ranks 8th of 49 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Congo averaged higher in 1 and Mozambique in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Congo | Mozambique | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 11.1% | 8.6% | 2.5% | Congo |
| 1990s | 3.9% | 12.1% | 8.2% | Mozambique |
| 2000s | 8.5% | 11.3% | 2.8% | Mozambique |
| 2010s | 13.0% | 13.8% | 0.8% | Mozambique |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher gross public investment, Congo or Mozambique?
- Congo, at 15.9% against 13.6% in Mozambique as of 2011.
- What is the difference in gross public investment between Congo and Mozambique?
- 2.3%, with Congo ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Mozambique?
- 27 years are reported by both, from 1985 to 2011.
- How do Congo and Mozambique rank globally for gross public investment?
- Congo ranks 6th and Mozambique ranks 8th of 49 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank national accounts data, and OECD National Accounts data files, published as Gross public investment (% of GDP). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Gross public investment (see definition below) as a percentage of GDP (%) . Public sectors’ gross domestic fixed investment (gross fixed capital formation) comprises all additions to the stocks of fixed assets (purchases and own-account capital formation), less any sales of second-hand and scrapped fixed assets measured at constant prices, done by government units and non-financial public enterprises. Most outlays by government on military equipment are excluded. According to 1993 SNA are outlays on weapons and equipment with no alternative civil use treated as intermediate consumption, and part of governments consumption expenditure.