Hong Kong, China vs Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of: Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-8) (DB15-20)
Hong Kong, China
87.5
in 2019
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
87.5
in 2019
Hong Kong, China rank
54th
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of rank
54th
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-8) (DB15-20) over time
- Hong Kong, China
- Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
How they compare
Hong Kong, China currently reports 87.5 against 87.5 in Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of has been ahead every year.
Hong Kong, China ranks 54th and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of ranks 54th of 191 countries.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-8) (db15-20), Hong Kong, China or Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- Hong Kong, China, at 87.5 against 87.5 in Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-8) (db15-20) between Hong Kong, China and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- 0, with Hong Kong, China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong, China and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Hong Kong, China and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of rank globally for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-8) (db15-20)?
- Hong Kong, China ranks 54th and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of ranks 54th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-8) (DB15-20 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 DB15-20 studies.