Saint Kitts and Nevis vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-12) (DB15-20)
Saint Kitts and Nevis
41.67
in 2019
Tanzania, United Republic of
41.67
in 2019
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
109th
Tanzania, United Republic of rank
109th
Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-12) (DB15-20) over time
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
- Tanzania, United Republic of
How they compare
Saint Kitts and Nevis currently reports 41.67 against 41.67 in Tanzania, United Republic of, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Tanzania, United Republic of has been ahead every year.
Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 109th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 109th of 191 countries.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-12) (db15-20), Saint Kitts and Nevis or Tanzania, United Republic of?
- Saint Kitts and Nevis, at 41.67 against 41.67 in Tanzania, United Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-12) (db15-20) between Saint Kitts and Nevis and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 0, with Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Kitts and Nevis and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Saint Kitts and Nevis and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for getting credit: strength of legal rights index (0-12) (db15-20)?
- Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 109th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 109th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting credit: Strength of legal rights index (0-12) (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 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 DB15-20 studies.