Congo, Democratic Republic of the vs Zimbabwe: Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Congo, Democratic Republic of the currently reports 9.4% against 6.6% in Zimbabwe, a difference of 2.8%.
That makes Congo, Democratic Republic of the's figure about 1.4 times Zimbabwe's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Zimbabwe ahead.
Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 183rd and Zimbabwe ranks 186th of 190 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Congo, Democratic Republic of the averaged higher in 1 and Zimbabwe in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.0% | 64.1% | 64.1% | Zimbabwe |
| 2010s | 6.6% | 4.6% | 2.0% | Congo, Democratic Republic of the |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Congo, Democratic Republic of the or Zimbabwe?
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the, at 9.4% against 6.6% in Zimbabwe as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Zimbabwe?
- 2.8%, with Congo, Democratic Republic of the ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Zimbabwe?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Zimbabwe rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 183rd and Zimbabwe ranks 186th 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.