El Salvador vs Zimbabwe: Informal care employment rate
Informal care employment rate over time
- El Salvador
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
El Salvador currently reports 53.41 against 52.08 in Zimbabwe, a difference of 1.33.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 5 shared years of data; in 2019 it was El Salvador ahead.
El Salvador ranks 13th and Zimbabwe ranks 14th of 43 countries.
El Salvador has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | El Salvador | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 54 | 53.56 | 0.433 | El Salvador |
| 2020s | 57.39 | 52.4 | 4.99 | El Salvador |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher informal care employment rate, El Salvador or Zimbabwe?
- El Salvador, at 53.41 against 52.08 in Zimbabwe as of 2025.
- What is the difference in informal care employment rate between El Salvador and Zimbabwe?
- 1.33, with El Salvador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Zimbabwe?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2019 to 2024.
- How do El Salvador and Zimbabwe rank globally for informal care employment rate?
- El Salvador ranks 13th and Zimbabwe ranks 14th of 43 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Labour Organization, published as Informal care employment rate (previous ILO definition - ICLS13). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
With the aim of promoting international comparability, statistics presented on ILOSTAT are based on standard international definitions wherever feasible and may differ from official national figures. This series is based on the 13th ICLS definitions. For time series comparability, it includes countries that have implemented the 19th ICLS standards, for which data are also available in the Work Statistics -- 19th ICLS (WORK) database. This harmonized series for informal employment is derived using the same set of criteria across countries to improve comparability. The criteria used are based on employment status, institutional sector, destination of production, bookkeeping, registration, social security contribution, places of work and size. For more information, refer to the Worker and Sector Profiles (PROF) database description.