Malawi vs Syrian Arab Republic: Starting a business: Procedures required - Men (number) - Score
Malawi
64.71
in 2019
Syrian Arab Republic
64.71
in 2019
Malawi rank
99th
Syrian Arab Republic rank
99th
Starting a business: Procedures required - Men (number) - Score over time
- Malawi
- Syrian Arab Republic
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 64.71 against 64.71 in Syrian Arab Republic, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Malawi ahead.
Malawi ranks 99th and Syrian Arab Republic ranks 99th of 191 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Malawi averaged higher in 1 and Syrian Arab Republic in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | Syrian Arab Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 47.06 | 42.02 | 5.04 | Malawi |
| 2010s | 56.47 | 64.71 | 8.24 | Syrian Arab Republic |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher starting a business: procedures required - men (number) - score, Malawi or Syrian Arab Republic?
- Malawi, at 64.71 against 64.71 in Syrian Arab Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in starting a business: procedures required - men (number) - score between Malawi and Syrian Arab Republic?
- 0, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Syrian Arab Republic?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Malawi and Syrian Arab Republic rank globally for starting a business: procedures required - men (number) - score?
- Malawi ranks 99th and Syrian Arab Republic ranks 99th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Starting a business: Procedures required - Men (number) - 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 number of procedures for men benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.