Equatorial Guinea vs Saint Lucia: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD)
Equatorial Guinea
28.3
in 2019
Saint Lucia
32.31
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea rank
165th
Saint Lucia rank
162nd
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Saint Lucia
How they compare
Saint Lucia currently reports 32.31 against 28.3 in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 4.01.
That makes Saint Lucia's figure about 1.1 times Equatorial Guinea's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Saint Lucia has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 165th and Saint Lucia ranks 162nd of 190 countries.
Saint Lucia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd), Equatorial Guinea or Saint Lucia?
- Saint Lucia, at 32.31 against 28.3 in Equatorial Guinea as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) between Equatorial Guinea and Saint Lucia?
- 4.01, with Saint Lucia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Saint Lucia?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Saint Lucia rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd)?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 165th and Saint Lucia ranks 162nd of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for the cost for border compliance to export benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.