Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Germany: Resolving insolvency: Strength of insolvency framework index (0-16)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
93.75
in 2019
Germany
93.75
in 2019
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
2nd
Germany rank
2nd
Resolving insolvency: Strength of insolvency framework index (0-16) over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Germany
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 93.75 against 93.75 in Germany, a difference of 0.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Germany has been ahead every year.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 2nd and Germany ranks 2nd of 191 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Germany | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 93.75 | 93.75 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 93.75 | 93.75 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16), Bosnia and Herzegovina or Germany?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 93.75 against 93.75 in Germany as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16) between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Germany?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Germany?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Germany rank globally for resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16)?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 2nd and Germany ranks 2nd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Resolving insolvency: Strength of insolvency framework index (0-16) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for strength of insolvency framework index 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.