New Zealand vs East Timor: Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4)
Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) over time
- New Zealand
- East Timor
How they compare
New Zealand currently reports 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in East Timor, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, East Timor has been ahead every year.
New Zealand ranks 40th and East Timor ranks 40th of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | New Zealand | East Timor | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 2010s | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 0 DB15-20 methodology | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4), New Zealand or East Timor?
- New Zealand, at 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in East Timor as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) between New Zealand and East Timor?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with New Zealand ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for New Zealand and East Timor?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do New Zealand and East Timor rank globally for resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4)?
- New Zealand ranks 40th and East Timor ranks 40th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) (DB15-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The creditor participation index has four components: (i) whether creditors appoint the insolvency representative or approve, ratify or reject the appointment of the insolvency representative; (ii) Whether creditors are required to approve the sale of substantial assets of the debtor in the course of insolvency proceedings; (iii) Whether an individual creditor has the right to access financial information about the debtor during insolvency proceedings; and (iv) Whether an individual creditor can object to a decision of the court or of the insolvency representative to approve or reject claims against the debtor brought by the creditor itself and by other creditors.