South Korea vs Sao Tome and Principe: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
South Korea
94.34
in 2014
Sao Tome and Principe
93.9
in 2014
South Korea rank
20th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
22nd
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- South Korea
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
South Korea currently reports 94.34 against 93.9 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.44.
Across all 10 years both countries report, South Korea has been ahead every year.
South Korea ranks 20th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 22nd of 184 countries.
South Korea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | South Korea | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 91.95 | 68.04 | 23.91 | South Korea |
| 2010s | 94.77 | 90.34 | 4.43 | South Korea |
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), South Korea or Sao Tome and Principe?
- South Korea, at 94.34 against 93.9 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0.44, with South Korea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do South Korea and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- South Korea ranks 20th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 22nd of 184 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.