Sudan vs Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of: Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index
Sudan
14.29
in 2019
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
14.29
in 2019
Sudan rank
123rd
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of rank
123rd
Protecting minority investors: Extent of corporate transparency index over time
- Sudan
- Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
How they compare
Sudan currently reports 14.29 against 14.29 in Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of, a difference of 0.
Across all 7 years both countries report, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of has been ahead every year.
Sudan ranks 123rd and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of ranks 123rd of 191 countries.
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index, Sudan or Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- Sudan, at 14.29 against 14.29 in Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index between Sudan and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- 0, with Sudan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sudan and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2019.
- How do Sudan and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of corporate transparency index?
- Sudan ranks 123rd and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of ranks 123rd 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.