South Korea vs Panama: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 me

South Korea
94.34
in 2014
Panama
94.44
in 2014
South Korea rank
20th
Panama rank
18th

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

  • South Korea
  • Panama
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Panama currently reports 94.44 against 94.34 in South Korea, a difference of 0.1.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Panama has been ahead every year.

South Korea ranks 20th and Panama ranks 18th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade South Korea Panama Difference Ahead
2000s 91.95 97.23 5.28 Panama
2010s 94.77 95.83 1.06 Panama

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, South Korea or Panama?
Panama, at 94.44 against 94.34 in South Korea as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between South Korea and Panama?
0.1, with Panama ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for South Korea and Panama?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do South Korea and Panama rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
South Korea ranks 20th and Panama ranks 18th 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.