Burkina Faso vs Comoros: Business telephone monthly subscription
Business telephone monthly subscription over time
- Burkina Faso
- Comoros
How they compare
Comoros currently reports 6.36 current US$ against 6.25 current US$ in Burkina Faso, a difference of 0.11 current US$.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 19 shared years of data; in 1993 it was Comoros ahead.
Burkina Faso ranks 26th and Comoros ranks 25th of 49 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Burkina Faso averaged higher in 1 and Comoros in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Burkina Faso | Comoros | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 4.1 current US$ | 5.57 current US$ | 1.47 current US$ | Comoros |
| 2000s | 5.79 current US$ | 5.42 current US$ | 0.3709 current US$ | Burkina Faso |
| 2010s | 6.1 current US$ | 6.21 current US$ | 0.1035 current US$ | Comoros |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher business telephone monthly subscription, Burkina Faso or Comoros?
- Comoros, at 6.36 current US$ against 6.25 current US$ in Burkina Faso as of 2011.
- What is the difference in business telephone monthly subscription between Burkina Faso and Comoros?
- 0.11 current US$, with Comoros ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Burkina Faso and Comoros?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2011.
- How do Burkina Faso and Comoros rank globally for business telephone monthly subscription?
- Burkina Faso ranks 26th and Comoros ranks 25th of 49 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication Development Report and database, and World Bank estimates, published as Business telephone monthly subscription (current US$). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Please cite the International Telecommunication Union for third-party use of these data. Monthly subscription refers to the recurring fixed charge for subscribing to the PSTN in US$. The charge should cover the rental of the line but not the rental of the terminal (e.g., telephone set) where the terminal equipment market is liberalized. Separate charges should be stated where appropriate, for first and subsequent lines. If the rental charge includes any allowance for free or reduced rate call units, this should be indicated. If there are different charges for different exchange areas, the largest urban area should be used and specified in a note. This indicator is expressed in US dollars.