Angola vs United Republic of Tanzania: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Angola
53.33
in 2013
United Republic of Tanzania
53.33
in 2013
Angola rank
83rd
United Republic of Tanzania rank
83rd
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Angola
- United Republic of Tanzania
How they compare
Angola currently reports 53.33 against 53.33 in United Republic of Tanzania, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Angola ahead.
Angola ranks 83rd and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 83rd of 190 countries.
Angola has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Angola | United Republic of Tanzania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 53.33 | 52 | 1.33 | Angola |
| 2010s | 53.33 | 53.33 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score, Angola or United Republic of Tanzania?
- Angola, at 53.33 against 53.33 in United Republic of Tanzania as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score between Angola and United Republic of Tanzania?
- 0, with Angola ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and United Republic of Tanzania?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Angola and United Republic of Tanzania rank globally for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
- Angola ranks 83rd and United Republic of Tanzania ranks 83rd of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for protecting minority investors benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator set. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB06-14 studies.