Armenia vs China (People’s Republic of): Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Armenia
82.1%
in 2019
China (People’s Republic of)
81.9%
in 2019
Armenia rank
15th
China (People’s Republic of) rank
16th
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Armenia
- China (People’s Republic of)
How they compare
Armenia currently reports 82.1% against 81.9% in China (People’s Republic of), a difference of 0.2%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was China (People’s Republic of) ahead.
Armenia ranks 15th and China (People’s Republic of) ranks 16th of 190 countries.
China (People’s Republic of) has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Armenia | China (People’s Republic of) | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 76.5% | 85.1% | 8.6% | China (People’s Republic of) |
| 2010s | 80.4% | 82.3% | 1.8% | China (People’s Republic of) |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Armenia or China (People’s Republic of)?
- Armenia, at 82.1% against 81.9% in China (People’s Republic of) as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Armenia and China (People’s Republic of)?
- 0.2%, with Armenia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Armenia and China (People’s Republic of)?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Armenia and China (People’s Republic of) rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Armenia ranks 15th and China (People’s Republic of) ranks 16th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for cost to enforce contracts 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.