Kyrgyzstan vs Saudi Arabia: Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score

Kyrgyzstan
56.78
in 2014
Saudi Arabia
56.46
in 2014
Kyrgyzstan rank
93rd
Saudi Arabia rank
95th

Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score over time

  • Kyrgyzstan
  • Saudi Arabia
0204060200320082014

How they compare

Kyrgyzstan currently reports 56.78 against 56.46 in Saudi Arabia, a difference of 0.32.

Across all 12 years both countries report, Kyrgyzstan has been ahead every year.

Kyrgyzstan ranks 93rd and Saudi Arabia ranks 95th of 181 countries.

Kyrgyzstan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Kyrgyzstan Saudi Arabia Difference Ahead
2000s 64.63 52.74 11.89 Kyrgyzstan
2010s 58.35 54.32 4.04 Kyrgyzstan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score, Kyrgyzstan or Saudi Arabia?
Kyrgyzstan, at 56.78 against 56.46 in Saudi Arabia as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score between Kyrgyzstan and Saudi Arabia?
0.32, with Kyrgyzstan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kyrgyzstan and Saudi Arabia?
12 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2014.
How do Kyrgyzstan and Saudi Arabia rank globally for enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score?
Kyrgyzstan ranks 93rd and Saudi Arabia ranks 95th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 2,113 data points, 2003–2014
Last refreshed

The score for enforcing contracts is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the procedures, time and cost for resolving a commercial dispute through a local first-instance court. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB04-15 studies.