Democratic Republic of the Congo vs Malawi: Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Democratic Republic of the Congo
9.4%
in 2019
Malawi
22.4%
in 2019
Democratic Republic of the Congo rank
183rd
Malawi rank
180th
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Malawi
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 22.4% against 9.4% in Democratic Republic of the Congo, a difference of 13.0%.
That makes Malawi's figure about 2.4 times Democratic Republic of the Congo's.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Malawi has been ahead every year.
Democratic Republic of the Congo ranks 183rd and Malawi ranks 180th of 190 countries.
Malawi has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Democratic Republic of the Congo | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | — |
| 2010s | 6.6% | 15.7% | 9.1% | Malawi |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Democratic Republic of the Congo or Malawi?
- Malawi, at 22.4% against 9.4% in Democratic Republic of the Congo as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Democratic Republic of the Congo and Malawi?
- 13.0%, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Democratic Republic of the Congo and Malawi?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Democratic Republic of the Congo and Malawi rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Democratic Republic of the Congo ranks 183rd and Malawi ranks 180th 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.