Rwanda vs Sweden: Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score

Rwanda
89.2
in 2014
Sweden
88.47
in 2014
Rwanda rank
14th
Sweden rank
17th

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

  • Rwanda
  • Sweden
020406080100200420092014

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 89.2 against 88.47 in Sweden, a difference of 0.73.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 11 shared years of data; in 2004 it was Sweden ahead.

Rwanda ranks 14th and Sweden ranks 17th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Rwanda Sweden Difference Ahead
2000s 45.13 88.31 43.18 Sweden
2010s 78.89 88.52 9.63 Sweden

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score, Rwanda or Sweden?
Rwanda, at 89.2 against 88.47 in Sweden as of 2014.
What is the difference in registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score between Rwanda and Sweden?
0.73, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Sweden?
11 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2014.
How do Rwanda and Sweden rank globally for registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score?
Rwanda ranks 14th and Sweden ranks 17th 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.