Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia
Indonesia: Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2013. ◆ Volatile
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia, 2004–2013
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB05-14 methodology.
Analysis
Indonesia recorded 5 DB05-14 methodology for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in 2013. That is the highest value across all 10 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over five years.
Over the whole period, getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia peaked at 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2008 and was at its lowest, 0 DB05-14 methodology, in 2004.
Indonesia ranks 31st of 184 countries on this measure, in the top quarter.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia, year by year
| Year | DB05-14 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2005 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2006 | 2 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2007 | 3 DB05-14 methodology | +50.0% |
| 2008 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +66.7% |
| 2009 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.5 DB05-14 methodology | 0 DB05-14 methodology | 5 DB05-14 methodology | 6 |
| 2010s | 5 DB05-14 methodology | 5 DB05-14 methodology | 5 DB05-14 methodology | 4 |
Countries ranked near Indonesia
- 31 China 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 India 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Russian Federation 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Japan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Brazil 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Albania 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Australia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Austria 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Azerbaijan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Belarus 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Bhutan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Botswana 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Cape Verde 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Chile 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Colombia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Croatia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Czechia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Estonia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Ghana 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Greece 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Hong Kong 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Iceland 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Iran, Islamic Republic of 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Ireland 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Israel 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Italy 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Kazakhstan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Kosovo 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Kuwait 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Latvia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Lebanon 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Mongolia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Morocco 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 New Zealand 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Oman 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Portugal 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Puerto Rico 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Romania 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Serbia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Singapore 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Spain 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Sri Lanka 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Taiwan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Thailand 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Türkiye 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Ukraine 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 United Arab Emirates 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Uruguay 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Uzbekistan 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Palestine, State of 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Zambia 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
More private sector data for Indonesia
- Merchandise trade 36.3% (2025)
- Food imports 10.2% (2025)
- Manufactures imports 65.4% (2025)
- Merchandise imports 241.86 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 22.9% (2025)
- Manufactures exports 47.4% (2025)
- Merchandise exports 282.91 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 990.16 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.1957 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 6.88 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia?
- Getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Indonesia was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2013, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) recorded in Indonesia?
- The highest recorded value was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2008.
- What is the lowest getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) recorded in Indonesia?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB05-14 methodology in 2004.
- How does Indonesia rank for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6)?
- Indonesia ranks 31st out of 184 countries with data for 2013.
- Where does this Indonesia data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) (DB05-14 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 10 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The depth of credit information index measures the coverage, scope and accessibility of credit information available through credit reporting service providers such as credit bureaus or credit registries. The index ranges from 0 to 8 based on the methodology in the DB05-14 studies.