Eswatini vs Mali: Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score

Eswatini
58.78
in 2014
Mali
58.94
in 2014
Eswatini rank
121st
Mali rank
119th

Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score over time

  • Eswatini
  • Mali
0204060200420092014

How they compare

Mali currently reports 58.94 against 58.78 in Eswatini, a difference of 0.16.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Eswatini ahead.

Eswatini ranks 121st and Mali ranks 119th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Eswatini averaged higher in 1 and Mali in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eswatini Mali Difference Ahead
2000s 55.19 50.48 4.71 Eswatini
2010s 58.12 58.94 0.8106 Mali

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score, Eswatini or Mali?
Mali, at 58.94 against 58.78 in Eswatini as of 2014.
What is the difference in registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score between Eswatini and Mali?
0.16, with Mali ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Eswatini and Mali?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Eswatini and Mali rank globally for registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score?
Eswatini ranks 121st and Mali ranks 119th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,968 data points, 2004–2014
Last refreshed

The score for registering property is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the procedures, time, cost to transfer property between two local companies, as well as the quality of land administration index that evaluates the reliability of infrastructure, transparency of information, geographic coverage, land dispute resolution and equal access to property rights. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB05-15 studies.