Equatorial Guinea vs Madagascar: Registering property (DB17-20 methodology) - Score

Equatorial Guinea
44.45
in 2019
Madagascar
44.4
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea rank
161st
Madagascar rank
162nd

Registering property (DB17-20 methodology) - Score over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Madagascar
010203040201520172019

How they compare

Equatorial Guinea currently reports 44.45 against 44.4 in Madagascar, a difference of 0.05.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 5 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Madagascar ahead.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 161st and Madagascar ranks 162nd of 188 countries.

Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher registering property (db17-20 methodology) - score, Equatorial Guinea or Madagascar?
Equatorial Guinea, at 44.45 against 44.4 in Madagascar as of 2019.
What is the difference in registering property (db17-20 methodology) - score between Equatorial Guinea and Madagascar?
0.05, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Madagascar?
5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
How do Equatorial Guinea and Madagascar rank globally for registering property (db17-20 methodology) - score?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 161st and Madagascar ranks 162nd of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Registering property (DB17-20 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 (DB17-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 950 data points, 2015–2019
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 DB17-20 studies.