Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Republic of Moldova: Getting credit (DB05-14 methodology) - Score
Getting credit (DB05-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Republic of Moldova
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 56.25 against 56.25 in Republic of Moldova, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Republic of Moldova ahead.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 80th and Republic of Moldova ranks 80th of 184 countries.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Republic of Moldova | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 60.42 | 50 | 10.42 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
| 2010s | 59.38 | 51.56 | 7.81 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit (db05-14 methodology) - score, Bosnia and Herzegovina or Republic of Moldova?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 56.25 against 56.25 in Republic of Moldova as of 2013.
- What is the difference in getting credit (db05-14 methodology) - score between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2013.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova rank globally for getting credit (db05-14 methodology) - score?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 80th and Republic of Moldova ranks 80th of 184 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting credit (DB05-14 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for getting credit benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator set. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB05-14 studies.