Slovenia vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Slovenia
85.8%
in 2019
Tanzania, United Republic of
84.0%
in 2019
Slovenia rank
4th
Tanzania, United Republic of rank
7th
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Slovenia
- Tanzania, United Republic of
How they compare
Slovenia currently reports 85.8% against 84.0% in Tanzania, United Republic of, a difference of 1.8%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
Slovenia ranks 4th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 7th of 191 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Slovenia averaged higher in 1 and Tanzania, United Republic of in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Slovenia | Tanzania, United Republic of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 79.8% | 84.0% | 4.2% | Tanzania, United Republic of |
| 2010s | 85.8% | 84.0% | 1.8% | Slovenia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Slovenia or Tanzania, United Republic of?
- Slovenia, at 85.8% against 84.0% in Tanzania, United Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Slovenia and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 1.8%, with Slovenia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Slovenia and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Slovenia and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Slovenia ranks 4th 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.