Grenada vs St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Grenada
- St. Vincent and the Grenadines
How they compare
Grenada currently reports 1 DB15-20 methodology against 1 DB15-20 methodology in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, St. Vincent and the Grenadines has been ahead every year.
Grenada ranks 57th and St. Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 57th of 190 countries.
St. Vincent and the Grenadines has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Grenada | St. Vincent and the Grenadines | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 2010s | 0.3 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.2 DB15-20 methodology | St. Vincent and the Grenadines |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher reorganization proceedings index (0-3), Grenada or St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
- Grenada, at 1 DB15-20 methodology against 1 DB15-20 methodology in St. Vincent and the Grenadines as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Grenada ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Grenada ranks 57th and St. Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 57th 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.