Malawi vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index
Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index over time
- Malawi
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 4 0-10 against 4 0-10 in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0 0-10.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Saint Kitts and Nevis has been ahead every year.
Malawi ranks 130th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 130th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4 0-10 | 4 0-10 | 0 0-10 | — |
| 2010s | 4 0-10 | 4 0-10 | 0 0-10 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index, Malawi or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Malawi, at 4 0-10 against 4 0-10 in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2019.
- What is the difference in protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index between Malawi and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 0 0-10, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Malawi and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for protecting minority investors: extent of disclosure index?
- Malawi ranks 130th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 130th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Protecting minority investors: Extent of disclosure index (0-10). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The extent of disclosure index measures the approval and disclosure requirements of related-party transactions. It has five components: (i) whether it is the managing director alone, the board of directors, or the general meeting of shareholders the corporate body who can provide legally sufficient approval for the transaction (points are assigned depending on whether interested directors are permitted to vote or not); (ii) whether an external body (an independent auditor, for example) must review the transaction before it takes place; (iii) whether disclosure by Mr. James to the board of directors or the supervisory board is required; (iv) whether immediate disclosure of the transaction to the public, the regulator or the shareholders is required; and (v) whether disclosure in periodic filings (for example, annual reports) is required.