Brunei Darussalam vs Hong Kong, China: Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index
Brunei Darussalam
80
in 2019
Hong Kong, China
80
in 2019
Brunei Darussalam rank
16th
Hong Kong, China rank
16th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index over time
- Brunei Darussalam
- Hong Kong, China
How they compare
Brunei Darussalam currently reports 80 against 80 in Hong Kong, China, a difference of 0.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Hong Kong, China has been ahead every year.
Brunei Darussalam ranks 16th and Hong Kong, China ranks 16th of 191 countries.
Hong Kong, China has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brunei Darussalam | Hong Kong, China | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 20 | 80 | 60 | Hong Kong, China |
| 2010s | 59 | 80 | 21 | Hong Kong, China |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index, Brunei Darussalam or Hong Kong, China?
- Brunei Darussalam, at 80 against 80 in Hong Kong, China as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index between Brunei Darussalam and Hong Kong, China?
- 0, with Brunei Darussalam ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brunei Darussalam and Hong Kong, China?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Brunei Darussalam and Hong Kong, China rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index?
- Brunei Darussalam ranks 16th and Hong Kong, China ranks 16th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index (0-10) - 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 director liability 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.