Bangladesh vs Grenada: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me

Bangladesh
81.02
in 2014
Grenada
80.61
in 2014
Bangladesh rank
98th
Grenada rank
101st

Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me over time

  • Bangladesh
  • Grenada
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Bangladesh currently reports 81.02 against 80.61 in Grenada, a difference of 0.41.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Grenada ahead.

Bangladesh ranks 98th and Grenada ranks 101st of 181 countries.

Grenada has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bangladesh Grenada Difference Ahead
2000s 74.4 76.63 2.22 Grenada
2010s 79.62 80.91 1.28 Grenada

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me, Bangladesh or Grenada?
Bangladesh, at 81.02 against 80.61 in Grenada as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Bangladesh and Grenada?
0.41, with Bangladesh ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bangladesh and Grenada?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Bangladesh and Grenada rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Bangladesh ranks 98th and Grenada ranks 101st of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 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 (US$ per container) (DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,813 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

The score for the cost 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 DB06-15 studies.