Central African Republic vs Zimbabwe: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Central African Republic
0
in 2014
Zimbabwe
16.01
in 2014
Central African Republic rank
177th
Zimbabwe rank
174th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Central African Republic
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 16.01 against 0 in Central African Republic, a difference of 16.01.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Zimbabwe has been ahead every year.
Central African Republic ranks 177th and Zimbabwe ranks 174th of 183 countries.
Zimbabwe has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 | 30.16 | 30.16 | Zimbabwe |
| 2010s | 0 | 29.06 | 29.06 | Zimbabwe |
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), Central African Republic or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 16.01 against 0 in Central African Republic as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Central African Republic and Zimbabwe?
- 16.01, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Zimbabwe?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Central African Republic and Zimbabwe rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Central African Republic ranks 177th and Zimbabwe ranks 174th 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.