Publication of rankings and data analytics

Data always beats opinions. That is why we focus on production of quality data and then turning that into meaningful information and ultimately into insight and rankings. Our aim is to repeat this on a regular basis to achieve tangible improvements.

We intend to do rankings and indexes because rankings appeal to our notion of who's on top, who's below. And they generate healthy competition leading to better outcomes and better management of issues.

Using rankings we hope to inspire change and encourage governments to take positive steps for laws and policies with regards to corruption and economic fraud.

Our ranking and index calculation methodology is different from mere subjective ranking based on whims and fancies of the ranking organization. After all, what's the value of creating so many indexes to measure human and economic development when they usually come to the same predictable conclusions?

We take an entirely different approach on ranking - We have a strict policy of using data science and analytics to build the indexes and rankings that we publish at any time. All our rankings will always be based on signals and metrics derived from actual, credible data sources.

Unlike transparency international's index, our index will Not be based on "Perception" but instead will be based on "On-ground Results"

One reason why Transparency International's corruption index fails in creating actual impact on government policies is because it is based on "Perception" instead of facts and hard data - Perception can be very different from reality and we do not see any value in measuring perception. That is why people see TI's index as a waste of media attention and a gross mismeasurement of corruption.

We want our index and ranking to be useful to governments in making policy changes to create a concrete impact in the form of improvements of the corruption situation in countries.