Guinea vs Qatar: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me

Guinea
89
in 2014
Qatar
88.74
in 2014
Guinea rank
55th
Qatar rank
57th

Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me over time

  • Guinea
  • Qatar
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Guinea currently reports 89 against 88.74 in Qatar, a difference of 0.26.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 8 shared years of data; in 2007 it was Qatar ahead.

Guinea ranks 55th and Qatar ranks 57th of 181 countries.

Qatar has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guinea Qatar Difference Ahead
2000s 70.39 87.94 17.55 Qatar
2010s 83.18 87.33 4.15 Qatar

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, Guinea or Qatar?
Guinea, at 89 against 88.74 in Qatar as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Guinea and Qatar?
0.26, with Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea and Qatar?
8 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2014.
How do Guinea and Qatar rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Guinea ranks 55th and Qatar ranks 57th 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

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,813 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

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.