Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States

United States: Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) was 81.11 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)
81.11
Change on year
up 5.8%
World rank
9th
of 191 countries
All-time high
81.11
in 2019
All-time low
76.67
in 2015
Years of data
5
2015–2019

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States, 2015–2019

0204060802015201720192015: 76.72016: 76.72017: 76.72018: 76.72019: 81.1

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

In 2019, enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States stood at 81.11. That is the highest value across all 5 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is up 5.8% on the previous year and up 5.8% over five years.

United States ranks 9th of 191 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States, year by year

Annual values for Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) (DB17-20 methodology) - Score in United States, 2015 to 2019.
Year Value Change
2015 76.67
2016 76.67 +0.0%
2017 76.67 +0.0%
2018 76.67 +0.0%
2019 81.11 +5.8%

Countries ranked near United States

  1. 6 Lithuania 83.33 compare
  2. 6 Turkey 83.33 compare
  3. 6 United Kingdom 83.33 compare
  4. 10 South Korea 80.56 compare
  5. 11 Denmark 77.78 compare
  6. 11 Norway 77.78 compare
  7. 11 Romania 77.78 compare
  8. 11 Taiwan 77.78 compare
  9. 11 United Arab Emirates 77.78 compare

See the full ranking of 191 places →

More reference data data for United States

All data for United States →

Frequently asked questions

What is enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States?
Enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States was 81.11 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) recorded in United States?
The highest recorded value was 81.11 in 2019.
What is the lowest enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) recorded in United States?
The lowest recorded value was 76.67 in 2015.
How does United States rank for enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-19)?
United States ranks 9th out of 191 countries with data for 2019.
Where does this United States data come from?
The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) (DB17-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 5 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States. Statizoid. Retrieved 27 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/stat/enforcing-contracts-quality-of-the-judicial-processes-index-0-19-db17-20-methodology-score/united-states/

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/stat/enforcing-contracts-quality-of-the-judicial-processes-index-0-19-db17-20-methodology-score/united-states/">Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) in United States</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-19) (DB17-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
191 places, 955 data points, 2015–2019
Last refreshed

The score for quality of judicial processes 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, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.