Marshall Islands vs Serbia: Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score

Marshall Islands
59.34
in 2019
Serbia
58.85
in 2019
Marshall Islands rank
114th
Serbia rank
116th

Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score over time

  • Marshall Islands
  • Serbia
0204060200320112019

How they compare

Marshall Islands currently reports 59.34 against 58.85 in Serbia, a difference of 0.49.

Across all 17 years both countries report, Marshall Islands has been ahead every year.

Marshall Islands ranks 114th and Serbia ranks 116th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Marshall Islands Serbia Difference Ahead
2000s 59.34 48.58 10.76 Marshall Islands
2010s 59.34 57.89 1.45 Marshall Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: time (days) - score, Marshall Islands or Serbia?
Marshall Islands, at 59.34 against 58.85 in Serbia as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: time (days) - score between Marshall Islands and Serbia?
0.49, with Marshall Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Marshall Islands and Serbia?
17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
How do Marshall Islands and Serbia rank globally for enforcing contracts: time (days) - score?
Marshall Islands ranks 114th and Serbia ranks 116th 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.