Israel vs Macau (China): Financial Institutions Depth Index
Financial Institutions Depth Index over time
- Israel
- Macau (China)
How they compare
Israel currently reports 0.6426 against 0.5946 in Macau (China), a difference of 0.048.
That makes Israel's figure about 1.1 times Macau (China)'s.
Across all 41 years both countries report, Israel has been ahead every year.
Israel ranks 30th and Macau (China) ranks 33rd of 183 countries.
Israel has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Israel | Macau (China) | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 0.4457 | 0.0945 | 0.3511 | Israel |
| 1990s | 0.4394 | 0.2031 | 0.2363 | Israel |
| 2000s | 0.5217 | 0.1875 | 0.3343 | Israel |
| 2010s | 0.6185 | 0.3162 | 0.3023 | Israel |
| 2020s | 0.6426 | 0.5946 | 0.048 | Israel |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher financial institutions depth index, Israel or Macau (China)?
- Israel, at 0.6426 against 0.5946 in Macau (China) as of 2020.
- What is the difference in financial institutions depth index between Israel and Macau (China)?
- 0.048, with Israel ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Israel and Macau (China)?
- 41 years are reported by both, from 1980 to 2020.
- How do Israel and Macau (China) rank globally for financial institutions depth index?
- Israel ranks 30th and Macau (China) ranks 33rd 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.