Grenada vs Jordan: Resolving insolvency: Commencement of proceedings index (0-3)
Grenada
2.5 DB15-20 methodology
in 2019
Jordan
2.5 DB15-20 methodology
in 2019
Grenada rank
52nd
Jordan rank
52nd
Resolving insolvency: Commencement of proceedings index (0-3) over time
- Grenada
- Jordan
How they compare
Grenada currently reports 2.5 DB15-20 methodology against 2.5 DB15-20 methodology in Jordan, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Jordan ahead.
Grenada ranks 52nd and Jordan ranks 52nd of 190 countries.
Grenada has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Grenada | Jordan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 2010s | 2.15 DB15-20 methodology | 2.05 DB15-20 methodology | 0.1 DB15-20 methodology | Grenada |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: commencement of proceedings index (0-3), Grenada or Jordan?
- Grenada, at 2.5 DB15-20 methodology against 2.5 DB15-20 methodology in Jordan as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: commencement of proceedings index (0-3) between Grenada and Jordan?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Grenada ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Grenada and Jordan?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Grenada and Jordan rank globally for resolving insolvency: commencement of proceedings index (0-3)?
- Grenada ranks 52nd and Jordan ranks 52nd of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Resolving insolvency: Commencement of 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 commencement of proceedings index has three components: (i) whether debtors can initiate both liquidation and reorganization proceedings; (ii) whether creditors can initiate both liquidation and reorganization proceedings; and (iii) what standard is used for commencement of insolvency proceedings.