Germany vs Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD)
Germany
67.45
in 2019
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
67.92
in 2019
Germany rank
105th
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank
103rd
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) over time
- Germany
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
How they compare
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines currently reports 67.92 against 67.45 in Germany, a difference of 0.47.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines has been ahead every year.
Germany ranks 105th and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 103rd of 191 countries.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 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), Germany or Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, at 67.92 against 67.45 in Germany as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) between Germany and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- 0.47, with Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Germany and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Germany and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd)?
- Germany ranks 105th and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 103rd of 191 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.