Micronesia (country) vs Nepal: Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score

Micronesia (country)
37.3
in 2019
Nepal
35.25
in 2019
Micronesia (country) rank
156th
Nepal rank
158th

Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score over time

  • Micronesia (country)
  • Nepal
010203040200320112019

How they compare

Micronesia (country) currently reports 37.3 against 35.25 in Nepal, a difference of 2.05.

That makes Micronesia (country)'s figure about 1.1 times Nepal's.

Across all 17 years both countries report, Micronesia (country) has been ahead every year.

Micronesia (country) ranks 156th and Nepal ranks 158th of 188 countries.

Micronesia (country) has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Micronesia (country) Nepal Difference Ahead
2000s 37.3 25.82 11.48 Micronesia (country)
2010s 37.3 34.3 2.99 Micronesia (country)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: time (days) - score, Micronesia (country) or Nepal?
Micronesia (country), at 37.3 against 35.25 in Nepal as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: time (days) - score between Micronesia (country) and Nepal?
2.05, with Micronesia (country) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Micronesia (country) and Nepal?
17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
How do Micronesia (country) and Nepal rank globally for enforcing contracts: time (days) - score?
Micronesia (country) ranks 156th and Nepal ranks 158th 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.