Brazil vs China: Vulnerability score, Capacity
Vulnerability score, Capacity over time
- Brazil
- China
How they compare
Brazil currently reports 0.425 against 0.4236 in China, a difference of 0.0014.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was China ahead.
Brazil ranks 125th and China ranks 126th of 177 countries.
China has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brazil | China | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.4231 | 0.4404 | 0.0174 | China |
| 2020s | 0.4251 | 0.4252 | 0.0001 | China |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher vulnerability score, capacity, Brazil or China?
- Brazil, at 0.425 against 0.4236 in China as of 2024.
- What is the difference in vulnerability score, capacity between Brazil and China?
- 0.0014, with Brazil ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and China?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Brazil and China rank globally for vulnerability score, capacity?
- Brazil ranks 125th and China ranks 126th of 177 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Vulnerability score, Capacity. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The ND-GAIN index is a global free open-source index, that measures a country’s current vulnerability to climate disruptions and assesses a country’s readiness to leverage private and public sector investment for adaptive actions. The IMF-adapted ND-GAIN index is an adaptation of the original index, adjusted by IMF staff to replace the Doing Business (DB) Index, used as source data in the original ND-GAIN, because the DB database has been discontinued by the World Bank in 2020 and it is no longer allowed in IMF work. The IMF-adapted ND-GAIN is an interim solution offered by IMF staff until the ND-GAIN compilers will review the methodology and replace the DB index.