Congo, Democratic Republic of the vs Mongolia: Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19)
Congo, Democratic Republic of the
30.56
in 2019
Mongolia
30.56
in 2019
Congo, Democratic Republic of the rank
150th
Mongolia rank
150th
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) over time
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the
- Mongolia
How they compare
Congo, Democratic Republic of the currently reports 30.56 against 30.56 in Mongolia, a difference of 0.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Mongolia has been ahead every year.
Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 150th and Mongolia ranks 150th of 190 countries.
Mongolia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19), Congo, Democratic Republic of the or Mongolia?
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the, at 30.56 against 30.56 in Mongolia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) between Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Mongolia?
- 0, with Congo, Democratic Republic of the ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Mongolia?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Congo, Democratic Republic of the and Mongolia rank globally for enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19)?
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the ranks 150th and Mongolia ranks 150th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) (DB17-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for quality of judicial processes index 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, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.