This article examines debt enforcement procedures in 88 countries by presenting insolvency practitioners with a standardized case study of an insolvent hotel. The study aims to measure the efficiency of debt enforcement, defined as the percentage of cases where the hotel is kept as a going concern. The data collected includes time, cost, and the likely disposition of assets. The results show that on average, debt enforcement is time-consuming, costly, and inefficient, with only 36% of cases achieving the efficient outcome. The efficiency of debt enforcement is strongly correlated with per capita income and legal origin, with richer countries and common law countries performing better. Specific economic and legal rules, such as deviations from absolute priority and the structure of appeals, also influence efficiency. The study concludes that efficiency measures predict debt market development and that richer countries have a comparative advantage in more complex procedures.This article examines debt enforcement procedures in 88 countries by presenting insolvency practitioners with a standardized case study of an insolvent hotel. The study aims to measure the efficiency of debt enforcement, defined as the percentage of cases where the hotel is kept as a going concern. The data collected includes time, cost, and the likely disposition of assets. The results show that on average, debt enforcement is time-consuming, costly, and inefficient, with only 36% of cases achieving the efficient outcome. The efficiency of debt enforcement is strongly correlated with per capita income and legal origin, with richer countries and common law countries performing better. Specific economic and legal rules, such as deviations from absolute priority and the structure of appeals, also influence efficiency. The study concludes that efficiency measures predict debt market development and that richer countries have a comparative advantage in more complex procedures.