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

Hungary
89.65
in 2014
Kiribati
89.98
in 2014
Hungary rank
52nd
Kiribati rank
49th

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

  • Hungary
  • Kiribati
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Kiribati currently reports 89.98 against 89.65 in Hungary, a difference of 0.33.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Hungary ahead.

Hungary ranks 52nd and Kiribati ranks 49th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Hungary averaged higher in 1 and Kiribati in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Hungary Kiribati Difference Ahead
2000s 81.51 80.46 1.05 Hungary
2010s 87.3 90.31 3.01 Kiribati

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, Hungary or Kiribati?
Kiribati, at 89.98 against 89.65 in Hungary as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Hungary and Kiribati?
0.33, with Kiribati ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Hungary and Kiribati?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Hungary and Kiribati rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Hungary ranks 52nd and Kiribati ranks 49th 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.