Thailand vs United States of America: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Thailand
80
in 2013
United States of America
82
in 2013
Thailand rank
9th
United States of America rank
8th
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score over time
- Thailand
- United States of America
How they compare
United States of America currently reports 82 against 80 in Thailand, a difference of 2.
Across all 9 years both countries report, United States of America has been ahead every year.
Thailand ranks 9th and United States of America ranks 8th of 191 countries.
United States of America has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Thailand | United States of America | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 70 | 83.33 | 13.33 | United States of America |
| 2010s | 80 | 83 | 3 | United States of America |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score, Thailand or United States of America?
- United States of America, at 82 against 80 in Thailand as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score between Thailand and United States of America?
- 2, with United States of America ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Thailand and United States of America?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Thailand and United States of America rank globally for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
- Thailand ranks 9th and United States of America ranks 8th 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.