East Timor vs Trinidad and Tobago: Starting a business: Cost - Women (% of income per capita) - Score
East Timor
99.7%
in 2019
Trinidad and Tobago
99.7%
in 2019
East Timor rank
19th
Trinidad and Tobago rank
21st
Starting a business: Cost - Women (% of income per capita) - Score over time
- East Timor
- Trinidad and Tobago
How they compare
East Timor currently reports 99.7% against 99.7% in Trinidad and Tobago, a difference of 0.0%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Trinidad and Tobago ahead.
East Timor ranks 19th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 21st of 191 countries.
Trinidad and Tobago has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | East Timor | Trinidad and Tobago | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 76.1% | 99.5% | 23.4% | Trinidad and Tobago |
| 2010s | 99.0% | 99.6% | 0.6% | Trinidad and Tobago |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher starting a business: cost - women (% of income per capita) - score, East Timor or Trinidad and Tobago?
- East Timor, at 99.7% against 99.7% in Trinidad and Tobago as of 2019.
- What is the difference in starting a business: cost - women (% of income per capita) - score between East Timor and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 0.0%, with East Timor ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for East Timor and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do East Timor and Trinidad and Tobago rank globally for starting a business: cost - women (% of income per capita) - score?
- East Timor ranks 19th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 21st of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Starting a business: Cost - Women (% 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 women 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.