Botswana vs Mongolia: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Botswana
40.41
in 2014
Mongolia
49.13
in 2014
Botswana rank
168th
Mongolia rank
165th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Botswana
- Mongolia
How they compare
Mongolia currently reports 49.13 against 40.41 in Botswana, a difference of 8.72.
That makes Mongolia's figure about 1.2 times Botswana's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Botswana ahead.
Botswana ranks 168th and Mongolia ranks 165th of 184 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and Mongolia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Mongolia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 30.33 | 11.41 | 18.92 | Botswana |
| 2010s | 36.52 | 39.79 | 3.26 | Mongolia |
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), Botswana or Mongolia?
- Mongolia, at 49.13 against 40.41 in Botswana as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Botswana and Mongolia?
- 8.72, with Mongolia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Mongolia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Botswana and Mongolia rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Botswana ranks 168th and Mongolia ranks 165th of 184 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.