Australia vs Central African Republic: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Australia
- Central African Republic
How they compare
Australia currently reports 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Central African Republic, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Central African Republic has been ahead every year.
Australia ranks 88th and Central African Republic ranks 88th of 190 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Australia | Central African Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | β |
| 2010s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | β |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher reorganization proceedings index (0-3), Australia or Central African Republic?
- Australia, at 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Central African Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Australia and Central African Republic?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Australia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Central African Republic?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Australia and Central African Republic rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Australia ranks 88th and Central African Republic ranks 88th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) (DB15-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The reorganization proceedings index has three components: (i) whether the reorganization plan is voted on only by the creditors whose rights are modified or affected by the plan; (ii) whether creditors entitled to vote on the plan are divided into classes, each class votes separately and the creditors within each class are treated equally; and (iii) whether the insolvency framework requires that dissenting creditors receive as much under the reorganization plan as they would have received in liquidation.