Getting credit: Depth of credit information index (0-6) in Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan: 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 Uzbekistan, 2004–2013
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB05-14 methodology.
Analysis
Uzbekistan 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 up 25.0% on the previous year.
Over the whole period, getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Uzbekistan peaked at 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2013 and was at its lowest, 0 DB05-14 methodology, in 2004.
Uzbekistan 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 Uzbekistan, 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 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2009 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2010 | 0 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2011 | 3 DB05-14 methodology | — |
| 2012 | 4 DB05-14 methodology | +33.3% |
| 2013 | 5 DB05-14 methodology | +25.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 DB05-14 methodology | 0 DB05-14 methodology | 0 DB05-14 methodology | 6 |
| 2010s | 3 DB05-14 methodology | 0 DB05-14 methodology | 5 DB05-14 methodology | 4 |
Countries ranked near Uzbekistan
- 31 China 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 India 5 DB05-14 methodology compare
- 31 Indonesia 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, China 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 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 Uzbekistan
- Merchandise trade 44.5% (2025)
- Food imports 12.4% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 71.9% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 41.75 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 11.4% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 29.0% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 23.65 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 638.38 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.1609 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 20.08 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Uzbekistan?
- Getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) in Uzbekistan 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 Uzbekistan?
- The highest recorded value was 5 DB05-14 methodology in 2013.
- What is the lowest getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6) recorded in Uzbekistan?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB05-14 methodology in 2004.
- How does Uzbekistan rank for getting credit: depth of credit information index (0-6)?
- Uzbekistan ranks 31st out of 184 countries with data for 2013.
- Where does this Uzbekistan 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.