Cote d'Ivoire vs South Africa: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Cote d'Ivoire
- South Africa
How they compare
Cote d'Ivoire currently reports 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in South Africa, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, South Africa has been ahead every year.
Cote d'Ivoire ranks 89th and South Africa ranks 89th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Cote d'Ivoire | South Africa | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 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), Cote d'Ivoire or South Africa?
- Cote d'Ivoire, at 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in South Africa as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Cote d'Ivoire and South Africa?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Cote d'Ivoire ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Cote d'Ivoire and South Africa?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Cote d'Ivoire and South Africa rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Cote d'Ivoire ranks 89th and South Africa ranks 89th of 191 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.