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

Mongolia
49.13
in 2014
Sudan
51.63
in 2014
Mongolia rank
162nd
Sudan rank
161st

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

  • Mongolia
  • Sudan
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Sudan currently reports 51.63 against 49.13 in Mongolia, a difference of 2.5.

That makes Sudan's figure about 1.1 times Mongolia's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Sudan ahead.

Mongolia ranks 162nd and Sudan ranks 161st of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Mongolia Sudan Difference Ahead
2000s 11.41 0 11.41 Mongolia
2010s 39.79 21.95 17.84 Mongolia

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, Mongolia or Sudan?
Sudan, at 51.63 against 49.13 in Mongolia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Mongolia and Sudan?
2.5, with Sudan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Sudan?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Mongolia and Sudan rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Mongolia ranks 162nd and Sudan ranks 161st 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.