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