Antigua and Barbuda vs Equatorial Guinea: Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score
Antigua and Barbuda
70.82
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea
70.9
in 2019
Antigua and Barbuda rank
50th
Equatorial Guinea rank
49th
Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score over time
- Antigua and Barbuda
- Equatorial Guinea
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 70.9 against 70.82 in Antigua and Barbuda, a difference of 0.08.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 50th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 49th of 188 countries.
Antigua and Barbuda has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Antigua and Barbuda | Equatorial Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 81.07 | 70.9 | 10.16 | Antigua and Barbuda |
| 2010s | 72.87 | 70.9 | 1.97 | Antigua and Barbuda |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: time (days) - score, Antigua and Barbuda or Equatorial Guinea?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 70.9 against 70.82 in Antigua and Barbuda as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: time (days) - score between Antigua and Barbuda and Equatorial Guinea?
- 0.08, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Equatorial Guinea?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Antigua and Barbuda and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for enforcing contracts: time (days) - score?
- Antigua and Barbuda ranks 50th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 49th of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for time 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.