Central African Republic vs Sri Lanka: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Central African Republic
- Sri Lanka
How they compare
Central African Republic currently reports 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Sri Lanka, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Central African Republic ahead.
Central African Republic ranks 88th and Sri Lanka ranks 88th of 190 countries.
Central African Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Sri Lanka | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.2143 DB15-20 methodology | 0.2857 DB15-20 methodology | Central African Republic |
| 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), Central African Republic or Sri Lanka?
- Central African Republic, at 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in Sri Lanka as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Central African Republic and Sri Lanka?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Central African Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Sri Lanka?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Central African Republic and Sri Lanka rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Central African Republic ranks 88th and Sri Lanka 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.