Marshall Islands vs Zimbabwe: Resolving insolvency: Recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - Score
Marshall Islands
18.38
in 2019
Zimbabwe
18.89
in 2019
Marshall Islands rank
152nd
Zimbabwe rank
150th
Resolving insolvency: Recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - Score over time
- Marshall Islands
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 18.89 against 18.38 in Marshall Islands, a difference of 0.51.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Marshall Islands ahead.
Marshall Islands ranks 152nd and Zimbabwe ranks 150th of 191 countries.
Marshall Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Marshall Islands | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 19.2 | 1.98 | 17.22 | Marshall Islands |
| 2010s | 18.74 | 13.62 | 5.12 | Marshall Islands |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - score, Marshall Islands or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 18.89 against 18.38 in Marshall Islands as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - score between Marshall Islands and Zimbabwe?
- 0.51, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Marshall Islands and Zimbabwe?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Marshall Islands and Zimbabwe rank globally for resolving insolvency: recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - score?
- Marshall Islands ranks 152nd and Zimbabwe ranks 150th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Resolving insolvency: Recovery rate (cents on the dollar) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for recovery rate benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.