Austria vs Dominican Republic: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Austria
53.33
in 2013
Dominican Republic
53.33
in 2013
Austria rank
83rd
Dominican Republic rank
83rd
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Austria
- Dominican Republic
How they compare
Austria currently reports 53.33 against 53.33 in Dominican Republic, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Austria ahead.
Austria ranks 83rd and Dominican Republic ranks 83rd of 190 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Austria averaged higher in 1 and Dominican Republic in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Austria | Dominican Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 53.33 | 43.33 | 10 | Austria |
| 2010s | 53.33 | 54.17 | 0.8334 | Dominican Republic |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score, Austria or Dominican Republic?
- Austria, at 53.33 against 53.33 in Dominican Republic as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score between Austria and Dominican Republic?
- 0, with Austria ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Austria and Dominican Republic?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Austria and Dominican Republic rank globally for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
- Austria ranks 83rd and Dominican Republic 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.