Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Dominican Republic: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
94.62
in 2019
Dominican Republic
96.25
in 2019
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
26th
Dominican Republic rank
24th
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Dominican Republic
How they compare
Dominican Republic currently reports 96.25 against 94.62 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a difference of 1.63.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Dominican Republic has been ahead every year.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 26th and Dominican Republic ranks 24th of 191 countries.
Dominican Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd), Bosnia and Herzegovina or Dominican Republic?
- Dominican Republic, at 96.25 against 94.62 in Bosnia and Herzegovina as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Dominican Republic?
- 1.63, with Dominican Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Dominican Republic?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Dominican Republic rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd)?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 26th and Dominican Republic ranks 24th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary 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 documentary 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.