Equatorial Guinea vs Luxembourg: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me
Equatorial Guinea
78.65
in 2014
Luxembourg
77.89
in 2014
Equatorial Guinea rank
116th
Luxembourg rank
118th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Luxembourg
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 78.65 against 77.89 in Luxembourg, a difference of 0.76.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Luxembourg ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 116th and Luxembourg ranks 118th of 181 countries.
Luxembourg has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Luxembourg | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 63.15 | 72.65 | 9.5 | Luxembourg |
| 2010s | 72.16 | 75.39 | 3.23 | 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 me, Equatorial Guinea or Luxembourg?
- Equatorial Guinea, 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 me between Equatorial Guinea and Luxembourg?
- 0.76, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Luxembourg?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2014.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Luxembourg rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 116th and Luxembourg ranks 118th of 181 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.