Liberia vs New Zealand: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3)
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Liberia
- New Zealand
How they compare
Liberia currently reports 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in New Zealand, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, New Zealand has been ahead every year.
Liberia ranks 89th and New Zealand ranks 89th of 191 countries.
New Zealand has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Liberia | New Zealand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 DB15-20 methodology | 0.1429 DB15-20 methodology | 0.1429 DB15-20 methodology | New Zealand |
| 2010s | 0.15 DB15-20 methodology | 0.5 DB15-20 methodology | 0.35 DB15-20 methodology | New Zealand |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher reorganization proceedings index (0-3), Liberia or New Zealand?
- Liberia, at 0.5 DB15-20 methodology against 0.5 DB15-20 methodology in New Zealand as of 2019.
- What is the difference in reorganization proceedings index (0-3) between Liberia and New Zealand?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Liberia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Liberia and New Zealand?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Liberia and New Zealand rank globally for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Liberia ranks 89th and New Zealand 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.