Antigua and Barbuda vs Bolivia, Plurinational State of: Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index
Antigua and Barbuda
28.57
in 2019
Bolivia, Plurinational State of
28.57
in 2019
Antigua and Barbuda rank
105th
Bolivia, Plurinational State of rank
105th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index over time
- Antigua and Barbuda
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of
How they compare
Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 28.57 against 28.57 in Bolivia, Plurinational State of, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Bolivia, Plurinational State of has been ahead every year.
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 105th and Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 105th of 191 countries.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index, Antigua and Barbuda or Bolivia, Plurinational State of?
- Antigua and Barbuda, at 28.57 against 28.57 in Bolivia, Plurinational State of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index between Antigua and Barbuda and Bolivia, Plurinational State of?
- 0, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Bolivia, Plurinational State of?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Antigua and Barbuda and Bolivia, Plurinational State of rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index?
- Antigua and Barbuda ranks 105th and Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 105th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index (0-7) (DB15-20 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 extent of corporate transparency 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 DB15-20 studies.