Asia and Pacific vs Denmark: Financial Institutions Depth Index
Financial Institutions Depth Index over time
- Asia and Pacific
- Denmark
How they compare
Denmark currently reports 0.9425 against 0.3244 in Asia and Pacific, a difference of 0.6181.
That makes Denmark's figure about 2.9 times Asia and Pacific's.
Across all 41 years both countries report, Denmark has been ahead every year.
Asia and Pacific ranks 4th and Denmark ranks 7th of 9 groups.
Denmark has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Asia and Pacific | Denmark | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0.1435 | 0.4843 | 0.3408 | Denmark |
| 1990s | 0.1876 | 0.66 | 0.4724 | Denmark |
| 2000s | 0.2266 | 0.8302 | 0.6036 | Denmark |
| 2010s | 0.2764 | 0.9254 | 0.649 | Denmark |
| 2020s | 0.3244 | 0.9425 | 0.6181 | Denmark |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher financial institutions depth index, Asia and Pacific or Denmark?
- Denmark, at 0.9425 against 0.3244 in Asia and Pacific as of 2020.
- What is the difference in financial institutions depth index between Asia and Pacific and Denmark?
- 0.6181, with Denmark ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Asia and Pacific and Denmark?
- 41 years are reported by both, from 1980 to 2020.
- How do Asia and Pacific and Denmark rank globally for financial institutions depth index?
- Asia and Pacific ranks 4th and Denmark ranks 7th of 9 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Financial Institutions Depth Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The dataset contains nine indices that summarize how developed financial institutions and financial markets are in terms of their depth, access, and efficiency. These indices are aggregated into an overall index of financial development. With the coverage of over 180 countries on annual frequency from 1980 onwards, the database should offer a useful analytical tool for researchers and policy makers.