Libya vs Sierra Leone: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16

Libya
45.77
in 2019
Sierra Leone
47.94
in 2019
Libya rank
143rd
Sierra Leone rank
141st

Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 over time

  • Libya
  • Sierra Leone
01020304050201420162019

How they compare

Sierra Leone currently reports 47.94 against 45.77 in Libya, a difference of 2.17.

Across all 6 years both countries report, Sierra Leone has been ahead every year.

Libya ranks 143rd and Sierra Leone ranks 141st of 188 countries.

Sierra Leone 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) (db16, Libya or Sierra Leone?
Sierra Leone, at 47.94 against 45.77 in Libya as of 2019.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) (db16 between Libya and Sierra Leone?
2.17, with Sierra Leone ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Libya and Sierra Leone?
6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
How do Libya and Sierra Leone rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) (db16?
Libya ranks 143rd and Sierra Leone ranks 141st of 188 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

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

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.