Saint Vincent and the Grenadines vs Trinidad and Tobago: Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6)

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
4.5 DB15-20 methodology
in 2019
Trinidad and Tobago
4.5 DB15-20 methodology
in 2019
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank
87th
Trinidad and Tobago rank
87th

Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) over time

  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Trinidad and Tobago
012345200320112019

How they compare

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines currently reports 4.5 DB15-20 methodology against 4.5 DB15-20 methodology in Trinidad and Tobago, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.

Across all 17 years both countries report, Trinidad and Tobago has been ahead every year.

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 87th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 87th of 191 countries.

Trinidad and Tobago has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Difference Ahead
2000s 2 DB15-20 methodology 3 DB15-20 methodology 1 DB15-20 methodology Trinidad and Tobago
2010s 3.25 DB15-20 methodology 3.9 DB15-20 methodology 0.65 DB15-20 methodology Trinidad and Tobago

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines or Trinidad and Tobago?
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, at 4.5 DB15-20 methodology against 4.5 DB15-20 methodology in Trinidad and Tobago as of 2019.
What is the difference in resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) between Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Trinidad and Tobago?
0 DB15-20 methodology, with Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Trinidad and Tobago?
17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
How do Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Trinidad and Tobago rank globally for resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6)?
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 87th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 87th of 191 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) (DB15-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines vs Trinidad and Tobago: Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6). Statizoid. Retrieved 13 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/resolving-insolvency-management-of-debtor-s-assets-index-0-6-db15-20-methodology/st-vincent-and-the-grenadines/trinidad-and-tobago/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/resolving-insolvency-management-of-debtor-s-assets-index-0-6-db15-20-methodology/st-vincent-and-the-grenadines/trinidad-and-tobago/">Saint Vincent and the Grenadines vs Trinidad and Tobago: Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) (DB15-20 methodology)
Unit
DB15-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
191 places, 3,247 data points, 2003–2019
Last refreshed

The management of debtor's assets index has six components: (i) whether the debtor (or an insolvency representative on its behalf) can continue performing contracts essential to the debtor’s survival; (ii) whether the debtor (or an insolvency representative on its behalf) can reject overly burdensome contracts; (iii) whether undervalued transactions entered into before commencement of insolvency proceedings can be avoided after proceedings are initiated; (iv) whether transactions entered into before commencement of insolvency proceedings that give preference to one or several creditors can be avoided after proceedings are initiated; (v) whether the insolvency framework includes specific provisions that allow the debtor (or an insolvency representa­tive on its behalf), after commencement of insolvency proceedings, to obtain financing necessary to function during the proceedings; and (vi) whether post-commencement finance receives priority over ordinary unse­cured creditors during distribution of assets.