Papua New Guinea vs Slovenia: Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10)
Papua New Guinea
50
in 2019
Slovenia
50
in 2019
Papua New Guinea rank
113th
Slovenia rank
113th
Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10) over time
- Papua New Guinea
- Slovenia
How they compare
Papua New Guinea currently reports 50 against 50 in Slovenia, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.
Papua New Guinea ranks 113th and Slovenia ranks 113th of 191 countries.
Papua New Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Papua New Guinea | Slovenia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 40 | 30 | 10 | Papua New Guinea |
| 2010s | 47 | 46 | 1 | Papua New Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10), Papua New Guinea or Slovenia?
- Papua New Guinea, at 50 against 50 in Slovenia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10) between Papua New Guinea and Slovenia?
- 0, with Papua New Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and Slovenia?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Papua New Guinea and Slovenia rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index (0-10)?
- Papua New Guinea ranks 113th and Slovenia ranks 113th 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.