Ecuador vs Slovak Republic: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Ecuador
75.49
in 2014
Slovak Republic
75.71
in 2014
Ecuador rank
130th
Slovak Republic rank
128th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Ecuador
- Slovak Republic
How they compare
Slovak Republic currently reports 75.71 against 75.49 in Ecuador, a difference of 0.22.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Slovak Republic has been ahead every year.
Ecuador ranks 130th and Slovak Republic ranks 128th of 183 countries.
Slovak Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Slovak Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 68.15 | 81.24 | 13.09 | Slovak Republic |
| 2010s | 73.49 | 74.84 | 1.35 | Slovak Republic |
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), Ecuador or Slovak Republic?
- Slovak Republic, at 75.71 against 75.49 in Ecuador as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Ecuador and Slovak Republic?
- 0.22, with Slovak Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Slovak Republic?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Ecuador and Slovak Republic rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Ecuador ranks 130th and Slovak Republic ranks 128th 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.