Equatorial Guinea vs South Korea: Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index … 0-10 DB05-14 Score
Equatorial Guinea
60
in 2013
South Korea
60
in 2013
Equatorial Guinea rank
76th
South Korea rank
76th
Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index … 0-10 DB05-14 Score over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- South Korea
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 60 against 60 in South Korea, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, South Korea has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 76th and South Korea ranks 76th of 184 countries.
South Korea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | South Korea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 30 | 60 | 30 | South Korea |
| 2010s | 52.5 | 60 | 7.5 | South Korea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10) (db05-14), Equatorial Guinea or South Korea?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 60 against 60 in South Korea as of 2013.
- What is the difference in getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10) (db05-14) between Equatorial Guinea and South Korea?
- 0, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and South Korea?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and South Korea rank globally for getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10) (db05-14)?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 76th and South Korea ranks 76th of 184 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-10) (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 strength of legal rights 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.