Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Eritrea: Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
50
in 2013
Eritrea
50
in 2013
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
112th
Eritrea rank
112th
Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Eritrea
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 50 against 50 in Eritrea, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Eritrea has been ahead every year.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 112th and Eritrea ranks 112th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Eritrea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 50 | 50 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 50 | 50 | 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), Bosnia and Herzegovina or Eritrea?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 50 against 50 in Eritrea as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Eritrea?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Eritrea?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Eritrea rank globally for protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 112th and Eritrea ranks 112th 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.