Bolivia vs Dominican Republic: Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score

Bolivia
61.39
in 2019
Dominican Republic
61.48
in 2019
Bolivia rank
101st
Dominican Republic rank
100th

Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score over time

  • Bolivia
  • Dominican Republic
020406080200320112019

How they compare

Dominican Republic currently reports 61.48 against 61.39 in Bolivia, a difference of 0.09.

Across all 17 years both countries report, Dominican Republic has been ahead every year.

Bolivia ranks 101st and Dominican Republic ranks 100th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Bolivia Dominican Republic Difference Ahead
2000s 61.39 67.92 6.52 Dominican Republic
2010s 61.39 63.61 2.21 Dominican Republic

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: time (days) - score, Bolivia or Dominican Republic?
Dominican Republic, at 61.48 against 61.39 in Bolivia as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: time (days) - score between Bolivia and Dominican Republic?
0.09, with Dominican Republic ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia and Dominican Republic?
17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
How do Bolivia and Dominican Republic rank globally for enforcing contracts: time (days) - score?
Bolivia ranks 101st and Dominican Republic ranks 100th 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

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 3,083 data points, 2003–2019
Last refreshed

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.