Côte d'Ivoire vs Luxembourg: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Côte d'Ivoire
78.65
in 2014
Luxembourg
77.89
in 2014
Côte d'Ivoire rank
117th
Luxembourg rank
119th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Côte d'Ivoire
- Luxembourg
How they compare
Côte d'Ivoire currently reports 78.65 against 77.89 in Luxembourg, a difference of 0.76.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Luxembourg ahead.
Côte d'Ivoire ranks 117th and Luxembourg ranks 119th of 183 countries.
Luxembourg has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Côte d'Ivoire | Luxembourg | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 62.18 | 72.65 | 10.47 | Luxembourg |
| 2010s | 67.94 | 75.39 | 7.46 | Luxembourg |
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), Côte d'Ivoire or Luxembourg?
- Côte d'Ivoire, at 78.65 against 77.89 in Luxembourg as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Côte d'Ivoire and Luxembourg?
- 0.76, with Côte d'Ivoire ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Côte d'Ivoire and Luxembourg?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2014.
- How do Côte d'Ivoire and Luxembourg rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Côte d'Ivoire ranks 117th and Luxembourg ranks 119th 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.