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

Lithuania
92.59
in 2014
Oman
92.27
in 2014
Lithuania rank
31st
Oman rank
33rd

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

  • Lithuania
  • Oman
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Lithuania currently reports 92.59 against 92.27 in Oman, a difference of 0.32.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Lithuania ahead.

Lithuania ranks 31st and Oman ranks 33rd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Lithuania Oman Difference Ahead
2000s 85.49 86.56 1.07 Oman
2010s 90.15 90.84 0.6901 Oman

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, Lithuania or Oman?
Lithuania, at 92.59 against 92.27 in Oman as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Lithuania and Oman?
0.32, with Lithuania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Lithuania and Oman?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Lithuania and Oman rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Lithuania ranks 31st and Oman ranks 33rd 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.