Dominican Republic vs Lithuania: Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index
Dominican Republic
40
in 2019
Lithuania
40
in 2019
Dominican Republic rank
108th
Lithuania rank
108th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index over time
- Dominican Republic
- Lithuania
How they compare
Dominican Republic currently reports 40 against 40 in Lithuania, a difference of 0.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Lithuania has been ahead every year.
Dominican Republic ranks 108th and Lithuania ranks 108th of 191 countries.
Lithuania has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Dominican Republic | Lithuania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 8 | 40 | 32 | Lithuania |
| 2010s | 40 | 40 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index, Dominican Republic or Lithuania?
- Dominican Republic, at 40 against 40 in Lithuania as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index between Dominican Republic and Lithuania?
- 0, with Dominican Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Dominican Republic and Lithuania?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Dominican Republic and Lithuania rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index?
- Dominican Republic ranks 108th and Lithuania ranks 108th 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.