Mauritania vs Switzerland: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Mauritania
73.2
in 2014
Switzerland
72.77
in 2014
Mauritania rank
135th
Switzerland rank
137th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Mauritania
- Switzerland
How they compare
Mauritania currently reports 73.2 against 72.77 in Switzerland, a difference of 0.43.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Switzerland ahead.
Mauritania ranks 135th and Switzerland ranks 137th of 183 countries.
Switzerland has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mauritania | Switzerland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 65.97 | 77.36 | 11.39 | Switzerland |
| 2010s | 71.83 | 74.41 | 2.58 | Switzerland |
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), Mauritania or Switzerland?
- Mauritania, at 73.2 against 72.77 in Switzerland as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Mauritania and Switzerland?
- 0.43, with Mauritania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritania and Switzerland?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Mauritania and Switzerland rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Mauritania ranks 135th and Switzerland ranks 137th of 183 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.