Saint Vincent and the Grenadines vs Palestine, State of: Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
28.57
in 2019
Palestine, State of
28.57
in 2019
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank
105th
Palestine, State of rank
105th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index over time
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- Palestine, State of
How they compare
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines currently reports 28.57 against 28.57 in Palestine, State of, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Palestine, State of has been ahead every year.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 105th and Palestine, State of ranks 105th of 191 countries.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines or Palestine, State of?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, at 28.57 against 28.57 in Palestine, State of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index between Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Palestine, State of?
- 0, with Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Palestine, State of?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Palestine, State of rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 105th and Palestine, 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.