Latvia vs United Arab Emirates: Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (DB05-14)
Latvia
83.33
in 2013
United Arab Emirates
83.33
in 2013
Latvia rank
31st
United Arab Emirates rank
31st
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (DB05-14) over time
- Latvia
- United Arab Emirates
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 83.33 against 83.33 in United Arab Emirates, a difference of 0.
Across all 10 years both countries report, United Arab Emirates has been ahead every year.
Latvia ranks 31st and United Arab Emirates ranks 31st of 184 countries.
United Arab Emirates has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | United Arab Emirates | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 13.89 | 27.78 | 13.89 | United Arab Emirates |
| 2010s | 83.33 | 83.33 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) (db05-14), Latvia or United Arab Emirates?
- Latvia, at 83.33 against 83.33 in United Arab Emirates as of 2013.
- What is the difference in getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) (db05-14) between Latvia and United Arab Emirates?
- 0, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and United Arab Emirates?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2013.
- How do Latvia and United Arab Emirates rank globally for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) (db05-14)?
- Latvia ranks 31st and United Arab Emirates ranks 31st of 184 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (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 the depth of credit information benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. 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.