Sao Tome and Principe vs Suriname: Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score
Registering property (DB05-15 methodology) - Score over time
- Sao Tome and Principe
- Suriname
How they compare
Sao Tome and Principe currently reports 48.66 against 48.49 in Suriname, a difference of 0.17.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Sao Tome and Principe has been ahead every year.
Sao Tome and Principe ranks 157th and Suriname ranks 159th of 184 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sao Tome and Principe | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 42.47 | 29.22 | 13.24 | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2010s | 47.98 | 32.14 | 15.84 | Sao Tome and Principe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score, Sao Tome and Principe or Suriname?
- Sao Tome and Principe, at 48.66 against 48.49 in Suriname as of 2014.
- What is the difference in registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score between Sao Tome and Principe and Suriname?
- 0.17, with Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sao Tome and Principe and Suriname?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Sao Tome and Principe and Suriname rank globally for registering property (db05-15 methodology) - score?
- Sao Tome and Principe ranks 157th and Suriname ranks 159th of 184 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
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.