Female unemployment — all countries

Female unemployment — Timor-Leste

Female unemployment in Timor-Leste in 2025 — 1.63%. Ranked 12 in the world out of 182. Since 1991, the indicator has fallen by 2.59 pp.

2025 1.63% +0.09 pp vs 2024
World rank 12of 182
Period maximum 6.24%2016
Period minimum 1.54%2024

Trend over time

1991–2025 · % of female labor force

Female unemployment — Timor-Leste, 1991–20250246819911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 4.22%1992: 4.11%1993: 4.01%1994: 4.05%1995: 4.1%1996: 4.13%1997: 4.17%1998: 4.28%1999: 4.43%2000: 4.32%2001: 4.14%2002: 4.12%2003: 4.33%2004: 4.48%2005: 4.41%2006: 4.44%2007: 4.31%2008: 4.2%2009: 4.02%2010: 4.04%2011: 3.88%2012: 3.7%2013: 3.53%2014: 3.29%2015: 3.05%2016: 6.24%2017: 5.66%2018: 4.97%2019: 4.11%2020: 3.56%2021: 2.93%2022: 1.55%2023: 1.54%2024: 1.54%2025: 1.63%
Change over the period: −2.59 pp Annual average: -0.08 pp

Comparison, 2025

How the value compares with the world and the groups this territory belongs to: Timor-Leste

Timor-Leste 1.63%
World 4.94%
South-Eastern Asia computed 2.39%
Female unemployment — Timor-Leste, by year Timor-Leste All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 1.63 +0.09 pp
2024 1.54 −0 pp
2023 1.54 −0.01 pp
2022 1.55 −1.37 pp
2021 2.93 −0.63 pp
2020 3.56 −0.55 pp
2019 4.11 −0.86 pp
2018 4.97 −0.69 pp
2017 5.66 −0.58 pp
2016 6.24 +3.19 pp
2015 3.05 −0.24 pp
2014 3.29 −0.24 pp
2013 3.53 −0.18 pp
2012 3.7 −0.17 pp
2011 3.88 −0.16 pp
2010 4.04 +0.01 pp
2009 4.02 −0.18 pp
2008 4.2 −0.11 pp
2007 4.31 −0.13 pp
2006 4.44 +0.03 pp
2005 4.41 −0.07 pp
2004 4.48 +0.15 pp
2003 4.33 +0.2 pp
2002 4.12 −0.02 pp
2001 4.14 −0.17 pp
2000 4.32 −0.12 pp
1999 4.43 +0.15 pp
1998 4.28 +0.11 pp
1997 4.17 +0.04 pp
1996 4.13 +0.03 pp
1995 4.1 +0.05 pp
1994 4.05 +0.04 pp
1993 4.01 −0.1 pp
1992 4.11 −0.11 pp
1991 4.22

About the indicator

The share of the female labor force that is unemployed. The gap with male unemployment reflects both the structure of labor demand and the barriers women face in reaching employment. In some countries the indicator looks favorable only because many women are outside the labor force altogether — it should be read alongside female labor force participation.

Source: ILOSTAT (ILO), license CC BY 4.0.