Central African Republic vs Equatorial Guinea: Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10)
Central African Republic
70
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea
70
in 2019
Central African Republic rank
55th
Equatorial Guinea rank
55th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10) over time
- Central African Republic
- Equatorial Guinea
How they compare
Central African Republic currently reports 70 against 70 in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 0.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.
Central African Republic ranks 55th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 55th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Equatorial Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 60 | 60 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 66 | 66 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10), Central African Republic or Equatorial Guinea?
- Central African Republic, at 70 against 70 in Equatorial Guinea as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10) between Central African Republic and Equatorial Guinea?
- 0, with Central African Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Equatorial Guinea?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Central African Republic and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10)?
- Central African Republic ranks 55th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 55th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure 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 disclosure 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.