Bolivia vs Guinea-Bissau: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Bolivia
77.56
in 2014
Guinea-Bissau
77.39
in 2014
Bolivia rank
120th
Guinea-Bissau rank
121st
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Bolivia
- Guinea-Bissau
How they compare
Bolivia currently reports 77.56 against 77.39 in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 0.17.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Guinea-Bissau ahead.
Bolivia ranks 120th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 121st of 183 countries.
Guinea-Bissau has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bolivia | Guinea-Bissau | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 57.04 | 71.65 | 14.61 | Guinea-Bissau |
| 2010s | 72.14 | 76.84 | 4.7 | Guinea-Bissau |
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), Bolivia or Guinea-Bissau?
- Bolivia, at 77.56 against 77.39 in Guinea-Bissau as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Bolivia and Guinea-Bissau?
- 0.17, with Bolivia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia and Guinea-Bissau?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Bolivia and Guinea-Bissau rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Bolivia ranks 120th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 121st of 183 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
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.