Mongolia vs Sweden: Multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (World Bank)
Multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (World Bank) over time
- Mongolia
- Sweden
How they compare
Sweden currently reports 1.6% against 1.3% in Mongolia, a difference of 0.3%.
That makes Sweden's figure about 1.2 times Mongolia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 7 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Mongolia ahead.
Mongolia ranks 33rd and Sweden ranks 30th of 68 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Mongolia averaged higher in 1 and Sweden in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mongolia | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 3.4% | 1.3% | 2.1% | Mongolia |
| 2020s | 1.3% | 2.4% | 1.1% | Sweden |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (world bank), Mongolia or Sweden?
- Sweden, at 1.6% against 1.3% in Mongolia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (world bank) between Mongolia and Sweden?
- 0.3%, with Sweden ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Sweden?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2022.
- How do Mongolia and Sweden rank globally for multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (world bank)?
- Mongolia ranks 33rd and Sweden ranks 30th of 68 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income econ, published as Multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (World Bank) (% of population). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The multidimensional poverty headcount ratio (World Bank) is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Multidimensional Poverty Measure. The Multidimensional Poverty Measure includes three dimensions – monetary poverty, education, and basic infrastructure services – to capture a more complete picture of poverty.