Antigua and Barbuda vs Cambodia: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Antigua and Barbuda
63.33
in 2013
Cambodia
63.33
in 2013
Antigua and Barbuda rank
34th
Cambodia rank
34th
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Antigua and Barbuda
- Cambodia
How they compare
Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 63.33 against 63.33 in Cambodia, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Cambodia has been ahead every year.
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 34th and Cambodia ranks 34th of 191 countries.
Cambodia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Antigua and Barbuda | Cambodia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 63.33 | 66.67 | 3.33 | Cambodia |
| 2010s | 63.33 | 65.83 | 2.5 | Cambodia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score, Antigua and Barbuda or Cambodia?
- Antigua and Barbuda, at 63.33 against 63.33 in Cambodia as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score between Antigua and Barbuda and Cambodia?
- 0, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Cambodia?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Antigua and Barbuda and Cambodia rank globally for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
- Antigua and Barbuda ranks 34th and Cambodia ranks 34th of 191 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.