China vs Tunisia: Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-10)
China
4 DB05-14 methodology
in 2013
Tunisia
4 DB05-14 methodology
in 2013
China rank
127th
Tunisia rank
127th
Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-10) over time
- China
- Tunisia
How they compare
China currently reports 4 DB05-14 methodology against 4 DB05-14 methodology in Tunisia, a difference of 0 DB05-14 methodology.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Tunisia has been ahead every year.
China ranks 127th and Tunisia ranks 127th of 184 countries.
Tunisia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | China | Tunisia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.83 DB05-14 methodology | 3.5 DB05-14 methodology | 0.6667 DB05-14 methodology | Tunisia |
| 2010s | 4 DB05-14 methodology | 4 DB05-14 methodology | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10), China or Tunisia?
- China, at 4 DB05-14 methodology against 4 DB05-14 methodology in Tunisia as of 2013.
- What is the difference in getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10) between China and Tunisia?
- 0 DB05-14 methodology, with China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China and Tunisia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2013.
- How do China and Tunisia rank globally for getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-10)?
- China ranks 127th and Tunisia ranks 127th 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). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The strength of legal rights index measures whether certain features that facilitate lending exist within the applicable collateral and bankruptcy laws. The index ranges from 0 to 10 based on the methodology in the DB05-14 studies.