North Macedonia vs South Sudan: Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)
North Macedonia
40
in 2013
South Sudan
40
in 2013
North Macedonia rank
132nd
South Sudan rank
132nd
Protecting minority investors: Ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) over time
- North Macedonia
- South Sudan
How they compare
North Macedonia currently reports 40 against 40 in South Sudan, a difference of 0.
Across all 9 years both countries report, South Sudan has been ahead every year.
North Macedonia ranks 132nd and South Sudan ranks 132nd of 191 countries.
South Sudan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | North Macedonia | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 30 | 40 | 10 | South Sudan |
| 2010s | 32.5 | 40 | 7.5 | South Sudan |
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), North Macedonia or South Sudan?
- North Macedonia, at 40 against 40 in South Sudan as of 2013.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10) between North Macedonia and South Sudan?
- 0, with North Macedonia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for North Macedonia and South Sudan?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do North Macedonia and South Sudan rank globally for protecting minority investors: ease of shareholder suits index (0-10)?
- North Macedonia ranks 132nd and South Sudan ranks 132nd 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.