Equatorial Guinea vs Puerto Rico: Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10)
Equatorial Guinea
70
in 2019
Puerto Rico
70
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea rank
55th
Puerto Rico rank
55th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10) over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Puerto Rico
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 70 against 70 in Puerto Rico, a difference of 0.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Puerto Rico has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 55th and Puerto Rico ranks 55th of 191 countries.
Puerto Rico has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Puerto Rico | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 60 | 70 | 10 | Puerto Rico |
| 2010s | 66 | 70 | 4 | Puerto Rico |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10), Equatorial Guinea or Puerto Rico?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 70 against 70 in Puerto Rico as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10) between Equatorial Guinea and Puerto Rico?
- 0, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Puerto Rico?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Puerto Rico rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10)?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 55th and Puerto Rico 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.