Kuwait vs Lao PDR: Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score

Kuwait
65.61
in 2014
Lao PDR
63.85
in 2014
Kuwait rank
96th
Lao PDR rank
99th

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

  • Kuwait
  • Lao PDR
0204060200420092014

How they compare

Kuwait currently reports 65.61 against 63.85 in Lao PDR, a difference of 1.76.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Kuwait ahead.

Kuwait ranks 96th and Lao PDR ranks 99th of 181 countries.

Kuwait has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Kuwait Lao PDR Difference Ahead
2000s 66.48 60.71 5.77 Kuwait
2010s 67.94 65.55 2.4 Kuwait

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score, Kuwait or Lao PDR?
Kuwait, at 65.61 against 63.85 in Lao PDR as of 2014.
What is the difference in registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score between Kuwait and Lao PDR?
1.76, with Kuwait ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kuwait and Lao PDR?
11 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2014.
How do Kuwait and Lao PDR rank globally for registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score?
Kuwait ranks 96th and Lao PDR ranks 99th 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.