Brunei Darussalam vs South Africa: Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)
Brunei Darussalam
80
in 2013
South Africa
80
in 2013
Brunei Darussalam rank
12th
South Africa rank
12th
Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) over time
- Brunei Darussalam
- South Africa
How they compare
Brunei Darussalam currently reports 80 against 80 in South Africa, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, South Africa has been ahead every year.
Brunei Darussalam ranks 12th and South Africa ranks 12th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brunei Darussalam | South Africa | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80 | 80 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 80 | 80 | 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), Brunei Darussalam or South Africa?
- Brunei Darussalam, at 80 against 80 in South Africa as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) between Brunei Darussalam and South Africa?
- 0, with Brunei Darussalam ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brunei Darussalam and South Africa?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Brunei Darussalam and South Africa rank globally for protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)?
- Brunei Darussalam ranks 12th and South Africa ranks 12th 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.