Dominica vs Equatorial Guinea: Registering property: Cost (% of property value) - Score
Dominica
11.6%
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea
16.7%
in 2019
Dominica rank
177th
Equatorial Guinea rank
175th
Registering property: Cost (% of property value) - Score over time
- Dominica
- Equatorial Guinea
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 16.7% against 11.6% in Dominica, a difference of 5.1%.
That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 1.4 times Dominica's.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.
Dominica ranks 177th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 175th of 191 countries.
Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Dominica | Equatorial Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 8.5% | 16.7% | 8.2% | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2010s | 11.3% | 16.7% | 5.3% | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher registering property: cost (% of property value) - score, Dominica or Equatorial Guinea?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 16.7% against 11.6% in Dominica as of 2019.
- What is the difference in registering property: cost (% of property value) - score between Dominica and Equatorial Guinea?
- 5.1%, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Dominica and Equatorial Guinea?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Dominica and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for registering property: cost (% of property value) - score?
- Dominica ranks 177th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 175th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Registering property: Cost (% of property value) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for cost benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.