Statizoid

Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal

Nepal: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) was 2 DB15-20 methodology in 2019. ◆ Volatile

Latest (2019)
2 DB15-20 methodology
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
30th
of 188 countries
All-time high
2 DB15-20 methodology
in 2007
All-time low
0 DB15-20 methodology
in 2003
Years of data
17
2003–2019

Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal, 2003–2019

00.511.522003201120192003: 0 DB15-20 methodology2004: 0 DB15-20 methodology2005: 0 DB15-20 methodology2006: 0 DB15-20 methodology2007: 2 DB15-20 methodology2008: 2 DB15-20 methodology2009: 2 DB15-20 methodology2010: 2 DB15-20 methodology2011: 2 DB15-20 methodology2012: 2 DB15-20 methodology2013: 2 DB15-20 methodology2014: 2 DB15-20 methodology2015: 2 DB15-20 methodology2016: 2 DB15-20 methodology2017: 2 DB15-20 methodology2018: 2 DB15-20 methodology2019: 2 DB15-20 methodology

Source: World Bank. Measured in DB15-20 methodology.

Analysis

In 2019, reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal stood at 2 DB15-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 17 years on record.

The figure is unchanged over ten years.

Over the whole period, reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal peaked at 2 DB15-20 methodology in 2007 and was at its lowest, 0 DB15-20 methodology, in 2003.

That places Nepal 30th out of 188 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top quarter.

The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 0.8571 DB15-20 methodology 0 DB15-20 methodology 2 DB15-20 methodology 7
2010s 2 DB15-20 methodology 2 DB15-20 methodology 2 DB15-20 methodology 10

Countries ranked near Nepal

  1. 30 Brazil 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  2. 30 Afghanistan 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  3. 30 Argentina 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  4. 30 Armenia 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  5. 30 Bahrain 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  6. 30 Chile 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  7. 30 Estonia 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  8. 30 Israel 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  9. 30 Kyrgyzstan 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  10. 30 Saudi Arabia 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  11. 30 Slovenia 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  12. 30 Spain 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  13. 30 United Arab Emirates 2 DB15-20 methodology compare
  14. 30 Vietnam 2 DB15-20 methodology compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Nepal

All data for Nepal →

Frequently asked questions

What is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal?
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Nepal was 2 DB15-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in Nepal?
The highest recorded value was 2 DB15-20 methodology in 2007.
What is the lowest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in Nepal?
The lowest recorded value was 0 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
How does Nepal rank for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
Nepal ranks 30th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) rising or falling in Nepal?
Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
Where does this Nepal data come from?
The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) (DB15-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 17 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

About this data

Indicator
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) (DB15-20 methodology)
Unit
DB15-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 3,230 data points, 2003–2019
Last refreshed

The reorganization proceedings index has three components: (i) whether the reorganization plan is voted on only by the creditors whose rights are modified or affected by the plan; (ii) whether creditors entitled to vote on the plan are divided into classes, each class votes separately and the creditors within each class are treated equally; and (iii) whether the insolvency framework requires that dissenting creditors receive as much under the reorganization plan as they would have received in liquidation.