Burkina Faso vs Madagascar: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Burkina Faso
- Madagascar
How they compare
Burkina Faso currently reports 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Madagascar, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Madagascar has been ahead every year.
Burkina Faso ranks 88th and Madagascar ranks 88th of 190 countries.
Madagascar has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Burkina Faso | Madagascar | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.6429 DB15-20 methodology | 0.1429 DB15-20 methodology | Madagascar |
| 2010s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher reorganization proceedings index (0-3), Burkina Faso or Madagascar?
- Burkina Faso, at 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Madagascar as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Burkina Faso and Madagascar?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Burkina Faso ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Burkina Faso and Madagascar?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Burkina Faso and Madagascar rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Burkina Faso ranks 88th and Madagascar 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.