Egypt vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Egypt
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Egypt currently reports 1 DB15-20 methodology against 1 DB15-20 methodology in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Saint Kitts and Nevis has been ahead every year.
Egypt ranks 58th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 58th of 191 countries.
Saint Kitts and Nevis has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Egypt | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 2010s | 0.2 DB15-20 methodology | 0.6 DB15-20 methodology | 0.4 DB15-20 methodology | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher reorganization proceedings index (0-3), Egypt or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Egypt, at 1 DB15-20 methodology against 1 DB15-20 methodology in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Egypt and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Egypt ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Egypt and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Egypt and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Egypt ranks 58th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 58th 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.