Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China

Hong Kong, China: Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score was 90 in 2013. ▬ Flat

Latest (2013)
90
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
3rd
of 190 countries
All-time high
90
in 2005
All-time low
90
in 2005
Years of data
9
2005–2013

Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China, 2005–2013

0204060801002005200920132005: 902006: 902007: 902008: 902009: 902010: 902011: 902012: 902013: 90

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

In 2013, protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score in Hong Kong, China stood at 90. That is the highest value across all 9 years on record.

The figure is unchanged over ten years.

Over the whole period, protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score in Hong Kong, China peaked at 90 in 2005 and was at its lowest, 90, in 2005.

That places Hong Kong, China 3rd out of 190 countries with data for 2013, putting it in the top 10%.

Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China, year by year

Annual values for Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China, 2005 to 2013.
Year Value Change
2005 90
2006 90 +0.0%
2007 90 +0.0%
2008 90 +0.0%
2009 90 +0.0%
2010 90 +0.0%
2011 90 +0.0%
2012 90 +0.0%
2013 90 +0.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 90 90 90 5
2010s 90 90 90 4

Countries ranked near Hong Kong, China

  1. 1 New Zealand 96.67 compare
  2. 2 Singapore 93.33 compare
  3. 3 Malaysia 90 compare
  4. 5 Canada 86.67 compare
  5. 5 Ireland 86.67 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Hong Kong, China

All data for Hong Kong, China →

Frequently asked questions

What is protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score in Hong Kong, China?
Protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score in Hong Kong, China was 90 in 2013, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score recorded in Hong Kong, China?
The highest recorded value was 90 in 2005.
What is the lowest protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score recorded in Hong Kong, China?
The lowest recorded value was 90 in 2005.
How does Hong Kong, China rank for protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score?
Hong Kong, China ranks 3rd out of 190 countries with data for 2013.
Is protecting minority investors (db06-14 methodology) - score rising or falling in Hong Kong, China?
Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Hong Kong, China data come from?
The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 9 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China. Statizoid. Retrieved 22 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/stat/protecting-minority-investors-db06-14-methodology-score/hong-kong-sar-china/

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/protecting-minority-investors-db06-14-methodology-score/hong-kong-sar-china/">Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score in Hong Kong, China</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Protecting minority investors (DB06-14 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 1,710 data points, 2005–2013
Last refreshed

The score for protecting minority investors benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator set. 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 DB06-14 studies.