Lao People's Democratic Republic vs Suriname: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Lao People's Democratic Republic
- Suriname
How they compare
Suriname currently reports 20 against 16.67 in Lao People's Democratic Republic, a difference of 3.33.
That makes Suriname's figure about 1.2 times Lao People's Democratic Republic's.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Suriname has been ahead every year.
Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 187th and Suriname ranks 186th of 190 countries.
Suriname has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lao People's Democratic Republic | Suriname | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 16.67 | 20 | 3.33 | Suriname |
| 2010s | 16.67 | 20 | 3.33 | Suriname |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score, Lao People's Democratic Republic or Suriname?
- Suriname, at 20 against 16.67 in Lao People's Democratic Republic as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score between Lao People's Democratic Republic and Suriname?
- 3.33, with Suriname ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lao People's Democratic Republic and Suriname?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Lao People's Democratic Republic and Suriname rank globally for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
- Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 187th and Suriname ranks 186th 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.