Sudan vs Syrian Arab Republic: Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6)
Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) over time
- Sudan
- Syrian Arab Republic
How they compare
Sudan currently reports 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in Syrian Arab Republic, a difference of 0 DB15-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Syrian Arab Republic ahead.
Sudan ranks 151st and Syrian Arab Republic ranks 151st of 191 countries.
Syrian Arab Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sudan | Syrian Arab Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 1 DB15-20 methodology | Syrian Arab Republic |
| 2010s | 1.4 DB15-20 methodology | 2 DB15-20 methodology | 0.6 DB15-20 methodology | Syrian Arab Republic |
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), Sudan or Syrian Arab Republic?
- Sudan, at 2 DB15-20 methodology against 2 DB15-20 methodology in Syrian Arab Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) between Sudan and Syrian Arab Republic?
- 0 DB15-20 methodology, with Sudan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sudan and Syrian Arab Republic?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Sudan and Syrian Arab Republic rank globally for resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6)?
- Sudan ranks 151st and Syrian Arab Republic ranks 151st 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
About this data
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.