Lebanon vs Russian Federation: Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (DB05-14)
Lebanon
83.33
in 2013
Russian Federation
83.33
in 2013
Lebanon rank
31st
Russian Federation rank
31st
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (DB05-14) over time
- Lebanon
- Russian Federation
How they compare
Lebanon currently reports 83.33 against 83.33 in Russian Federation, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Russian Federation ahead.
Lebanon ranks 31st and Russian Federation ranks 31st of 184 countries.
Lebanon has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lebanon | Russian Federation | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 27.78 | 25 | 2.78 | Lebanon |
| 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), Lebanon or Russian Federation?
- Lebanon, at 83.33 against 83.33 in Russian Federation as of 2013.
- What is the difference in getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) (db05-14) between Lebanon and Russian Federation?
- 0, with Lebanon ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lebanon and Russian Federation?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2013.
- How do Lebanon and Russian Federation rank globally for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) (db05-14)?
- Lebanon ranks 31st and Russian Federation 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.