Republic of Moldova vs Nepal: Starting a business: Paid-in Minimum capital (% of income per capita)
Republic of Moldova
100.0%
in 2019
Nepal
100.0%
in 2019
Republic of Moldova rank
1st
Nepal rank
1st
Starting a business: Paid-in Minimum capital (% of income per capita) over time
- Republic of Moldova
- Nepal
How they compare
Republic of Moldova currently reports 100.0% against 100.0% in Nepal, a difference of 0.0%.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Nepal has been ahead every year.
Republic of Moldova ranks 1st and Nepal ranks 1st of 191 countries.
Nepal has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Republic of Moldova | Nepal | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 95.1% | 100.0% | 4.9% | Nepal |
| 2010s | 99.0% | 100.0% | 1.0% | Nepal |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher starting a business: paid-in minimum capital (% of income per capita), Republic of Moldova or Nepal?
- Republic of Moldova, at 100.0% against 100.0% in Nepal as of 2019.
- What is the difference in starting a business: paid-in minimum capital (% of income per capita) between Republic of Moldova and Nepal?
- 0.0%, with Republic of Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Republic of Moldova and Nepal?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Republic of Moldova and Nepal rank globally for starting a business: paid-in minimum capital (% of income per capita)?
- Republic of Moldova ranks 1st and Nepal ranks 1st of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Starting a business: Paid-in Minimum capital (% 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 paid-in minimum capital requirement 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.