Lithuania vs Republic of Moldova: Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index
Lithuania
40
in 2019
Republic of Moldova
40
in 2019
Lithuania rank
108th
Republic of Moldova rank
108th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index over time
- Lithuania
- Republic of Moldova
How they compare
Lithuania currently reports 40 against 40 in Republic of Moldova, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Lithuania ahead.
Lithuania ranks 108th and Republic of Moldova ranks 108th of 191 countries.
Lithuania has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lithuania | Republic of Moldova | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 40 | 20 | 20 | Lithuania |
| 2010s | 40 | 36 | 4 | Lithuania |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index, Lithuania or Republic of Moldova?
- Lithuania, at 40 against 40 in Republic of Moldova as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index between Lithuania and Republic of Moldova?
- 0, with Lithuania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lithuania and Republic of Moldova?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Lithuania and Republic of Moldova rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index?
- Lithuania ranks 108th and Republic of Moldova 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.