Bahrain vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Bahrain
83.6%
in 2019
Tanzania, United Republic of
84.0%
in 2019
Bahrain rank
9th
Tanzania, United Republic of rank
7th
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Bahrain
- Tanzania, United Republic of
How they compare
Tanzania, United Republic of currently reports 84.0% against 83.6% in Bahrain, a difference of 0.4%.
Across all 13 years both countries report, Tanzania, United Republic of has been ahead every year.
Bahrain ranks 9th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 7th of 191 countries.
Tanzania, United Republic of has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bahrain | Tanzania, United Republic of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 83.6% | 84.0% | 0.5% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
| 2010s | 83.6% | 84.0% | 0.5% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Bahrain or Tanzania, United Republic of?
- Tanzania, United Republic of, at 84.0% against 83.6% in Bahrain as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Bahrain and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 0.4%, with Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bahrain and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2019.
- How do Bahrain and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Bahrain ranks 9th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 7th of 191 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.