Bolivia, Plurinational State of vs Chile: Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)
Bolivia, Plurinational State of
60
in 2013
Chile
60
in 2013
Bolivia, Plurinational State of rank
78th
Chile rank
78th
Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) over time
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of
- Chile
How they compare
Bolivia, Plurinational State of currently reports 60 against 60 in Chile, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Chile has been ahead every year.
Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 78th and Chile ranks 78th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bolivia, Plurinational State of | Chile | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 60 | 60 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 60 | 60 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10), Bolivia, Plurinational State of or Chile?
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of, at 60 against 60 in Chile as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) between Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Chile?
- 0, with Bolivia, Plurinational State of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Chile?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Chile rank globally for protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)?
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 78th and Chile ranks 78th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) (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 ease of shareholder suits index benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. 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.