Moldova vs St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 methodology) - Score

Moldova
63.65
in 2019
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
63.66
in 2019
Moldova rank
61st
St. Vincent and the Grenadines rank
60th

Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 methodology) - Score over time

  • Moldova
  • St. Vincent and the Grenadines
0204060201520172019

How they compare

St. Vincent and the Grenadines currently reports 63.66 against 63.65 in Moldova, a difference of 0.01.

Across all 5 years both countries report, St. Vincent and the Grenadines has been ahead every year.

Moldova ranks 61st and St. Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 60th of 188 countries.

St. Vincent and the Grenadines has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score, Moldova or St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
St. Vincent and the Grenadines, at 63.66 against 63.65 in Moldova as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score between Moldova and St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
0.01, with St. Vincent and the Grenadines ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Moldova and St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
How do Moldova and St. Vincent and the Grenadines rank globally for enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score?
Moldova ranks 61st and St. Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 60th of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 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 (DB17-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 950 data points, 2015–2019
Last refreshed

The score for enforcing contracts is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the time and cost for resolving a commercial dispute through a local first-instance court, as well as the quality of judicial processes that promotes quality and efficiency in the court system. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.