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

Indonesia
96.47
in 2014
Morocco
95.97
in 2014
Indonesia rank
7th
Morocco rank
10th

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

  • Indonesia
  • Morocco
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Indonesia currently reports 96.47 against 95.97 in Morocco, a difference of 0.5.

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

Indonesia ranks 7th and Morocco ranks 10th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Indonesia Morocco Difference Ahead
2000s 86.3 95.26 8.96 Morocco
2010s 93.81 95.92 2.12 Morocco

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, Indonesia or Morocco?
Indonesia, at 96.47 against 95.97 in Morocco as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Indonesia and Morocco?
0.5, with Indonesia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Indonesia and Morocco?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Indonesia and Morocco rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Indonesia ranks 7th and Morocco ranks 10th 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.