Lao People's Democratic Republic vs Sao Tome and Principe: Protecting minority investors (DB15-20 methodology) - Score
Lao People's Democratic Republic
20
in 2019
Sao Tome and Principe
20
in 2019
Lao People's Democratic Republic rank
180th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
180th
Protecting minority investors (DB15-20 methodology) - Score over time
- Lao People's Democratic Republic
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Lao People's Democratic Republic currently reports 20 against 20 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Sao Tome and Principe has been ahead every year.
Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 180th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 180th of 191 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors (db15-20 methodology) - score, Lao People's Democratic Republic or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Lao People's Democratic Republic, at 20 against 20 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors (db15-20 methodology) - score between Lao People's Democratic Republic and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0, with Lao People's Democratic Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lao People's Democratic Republic and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Lao People's Democratic Republic and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for protecting minority investors (db15-20 methodology) - score?
- Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 180th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 180th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors (DB15-20 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 DB15-20 studies.