Mongolia vs Solomon Islands: Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)
Mongolia
80
in 2013
Solomon Islands
80
in 2013
Mongolia rank
12th
Solomon Islands rank
12th
Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) over time
- Mongolia
- Solomon Islands
How they compare
Mongolia currently reports 80 against 80 in Solomon Islands, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Mongolia ahead.
Mongolia ranks 12th and Solomon Islands ranks 12th of 191 countries.
Mongolia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mongolia | Solomon Islands | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80 | 70 | 10 | Mongolia |
| 2010s | 80 | 77.5 | 2.5 | Mongolia |
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), Mongolia or Solomon Islands?
- Mongolia, at 80 against 80 in Solomon Islands as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) between Mongolia and Solomon Islands?
- 0, with Mongolia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Solomon Islands?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Mongolia and Solomon Islands rank globally for protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)?
- Mongolia ranks 12th and Solomon Islands 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.