Guatemala vs Papua New Guinea: Starting a business: Cost - Men (% of income per capita) - Score
Guatemala
91.3%
in 2019
Papua New Guinea
90.7%
in 2019
Guatemala rank
137th
Papua New Guinea rank
140th
Starting a business: Cost - Men (% of income per capita) - Score over time
- Guatemala
- Papua New Guinea
How they compare
Guatemala currently reports 91.3% against 90.7% in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.6%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.
Guatemala ranks 137th and Papua New Guinea ranks 140th of 191 countries.
Papua New Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Guatemala | Papua New Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 72.1% | 87.6% | 15.5% | Papua New Guinea |
| 2010s | 83.5% | 89.8% | 6.3% | Papua New Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher starting a business: cost - men (% of income per capita) - score, Guatemala or Papua New Guinea?
- Guatemala, at 91.3% against 90.7% in Papua New Guinea as of 2019.
- What is the difference in starting a business: cost - men (% of income per capita) - score between Guatemala and Papua New Guinea?
- 0.6%, with Guatemala ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Papua New Guinea?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Guatemala and Papua New Guinea rank globally for starting a business: cost - men (% of income per capita) - score?
- Guatemala ranks 137th and Papua New Guinea ranks 140th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Starting a business: Cost - Men (% of income per capita) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for the cost for men benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.