Seychelles vs Uzbekistan: Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4)
Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) over time
- Seychelles
- Uzbekistan
How they compare
Seychelles currently reports 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in Uzbekistan, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Uzbekistan has been ahead every year.
Seychelles ranks 40th and Uzbekistan ranks 40th of 190 countries.
Uzbekistan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Seychelles | Uzbekistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1 DB15-20 methodology | 1.86 DB15-20 methodology | 0.8571 DB15-20 methodology | Uzbekistan |
| 2010s | 1.6 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 0.4 DB15-20 methodology | Uzbekistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4), Seychelles or Uzbekistan?
- Seychelles, at 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in Uzbekistan as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) between Seychelles and Uzbekistan?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Seychelles ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Seychelles and Uzbekistan?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Seychelles and Uzbekistan rank globally for resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4)?
- Seychelles ranks 40th and Uzbekistan ranks 40th of 190 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.