Iceland vs New Zealand: Financial Institutions Depth Index
Financial Institutions Depth Index over time
- Iceland
- New Zealand
How they compare
New Zealand currently reports 0.77 against 0.7161 in Iceland, a difference of 0.0539.
That makes New Zealand's figure about 1.1 times Iceland's.
The two have swapped places 6 times across 41 shared years of data; in 1980 it was New Zealand ahead.
Iceland ranks 22nd and New Zealand ranks 19th of 183 countries.
Across the 5 decades both report, Iceland averaged higher in 3 and New Zealand in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Iceland | New Zealand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0.3302 | 0.3129 | 0.0173 | Iceland |
| 1990s | 0.4447 | 0.502 | 0.0573 | New Zealand |
| 2000s | 0.6941 | 0.4622 | 0.2319 | Iceland |
| 2010s | 0.6643 | 0.5889 | 0.0754 | Iceland |
| 2020s | 0.7161 | 0.77 | 0.0539 | New Zealand |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher financial institutions depth index, Iceland or New Zealand?
- New Zealand, at 0.77 against 0.7161 in Iceland as of 2020.
- What is the difference in financial institutions depth index between Iceland and New Zealand?
- 0.0539, with New Zealand ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and New Zealand?
- 41 years are reported by both, from 1980 to 2020.
- How do Iceland and New Zealand rank globally for financial institutions depth index?
- Iceland ranks 22nd and New Zealand ranks 19th of 183 countries.
- 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.