Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia
Russia: Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2013. ◆ Volatile
Latest (2013)
5 DB05-14 methodology
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
31st
of 184 countries
All-time high
5 DB05-14 methodology
in 2009
All-time low
0 DB05-14 methodology
in 2004
Years of data
10
2004–2013
Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia, 2004–2013
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB05-14 methodology.
Analysis
In 2013, getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia stood at 5 DB05-14 methodology. That is the highest value across all 10 years on record.
The figure is up 25.0% over five years.
Over the whole period, getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia peaked at 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2009 and was at its lowest, 0 DB05-14 methodology, in 2004.
Russia 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 Russia, year by year
| Year | DB05-14 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2005 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2006 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2007 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2008 | 4 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2009 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +25.0% |
| 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 | 1.5 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 Russia
- 31 China 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 India 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Indonesia 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 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 Turkey 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 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Palestine 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 Russia
- Merchandise trade 28.2% (2025)
- Food imports 10.9% (2021)
- Manufactures imports 79.8% (2021)
- Merchandise imports 302.71 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 6.6% (2021)
- Manufactures exports 22.1% (2021)
- Merchandise exports 419.40 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 2,922 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.1637 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate -3.28 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia?
- Getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Russia 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 Russia?
- The highest recorded value was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2009.
- What is the lowest getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) recorded in Russia?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB05-14 methodology in 2004.
- How does Russia rank for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6)?
- Russia ranks 31st out of 184 countries with data for 2013.
- Where does this Russia 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.