Tajikistan vs United Kingdom: Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score

Tajikistan
74.59
in 2019
United Kingdom
74.02
in 2019
Tajikistan rank
37th
United Kingdom rank
39th

Enforcing contracts: Time (days) - Score over time

  • Tajikistan
  • United Kingdom
020406080200320112019

How they compare

Tajikistan currently reports 74.59 against 74.02 in United Kingdom, a difference of 0.57.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was United Kingdom ahead.

Tajikistan ranks 37th and United Kingdom ranks 39th of 188 countries.

United Kingdom has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Tajikistan United Kingdom Difference Ahead
2000s 74.59 76.8 2.21 United Kingdom
2010s 74.59 74.64 0.0491 United Kingdom

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: time (days) - score, Tajikistan or United Kingdom?
Tajikistan, at 74.59 against 74.02 in United Kingdom as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: time (days) - score between Tajikistan and United Kingdom?
0.57, with Tajikistan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Tajikistan and United Kingdom?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Tajikistan and United Kingdom rank globally for enforcing contracts: time (days) - score?
Tajikistan ranks 37th and United Kingdom ranks 39th 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.