Croatia vs Montenegro: Resolving insolvency: Strength of insolvency framework index (0-16)
Croatia
75
in 2019
Montenegro
78.12
in 2019
Croatia rank
31st
Montenegro rank
28th
Resolving insolvency: Strength of insolvency framework index (0-16) over time
- Croatia
- Montenegro
How they compare
Montenegro currently reports 78.12 against 75 in Croatia, a difference of 3.12.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Croatia ahead.
Croatia ranks 31st and Montenegro ranks 28th of 191 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Croatia averaged higher in 1 and Montenegro in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Croatia | Montenegro | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 75 | 71.88 | 3.12 | Croatia |
| 2010s | 74.06 | 77.5 | 3.44 | Montenegro |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16), Croatia or Montenegro?
- Montenegro, at 78.12 against 75 in Croatia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16) between Croatia and Montenegro?
- 3.12, with Montenegro ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Montenegro?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Croatia and Montenegro rank globally for resolving insolvency: strength of insolvency framework index (0-16)?
- Croatia ranks 31st and Montenegro ranks 28th 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.