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

Nepal
53.49
in 2014
Sudan
51.63
in 2014
Nepal rank
160th
Sudan rank
161st

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

  • Nepal
  • Sudan
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Nepal currently reports 53.49 against 51.63 in Sudan, a difference of 1.86.

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

Nepal ranks 160th and Sudan ranks 161st of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Nepal Sudan Difference Ahead
2000s 39.49 0 39.49 Nepal
2010s 54.32 21.95 32.37 Nepal

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, Nepal or Sudan?
Nepal, at 53.49 against 51.63 in Sudan as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Nepal and Sudan?
1.86, with Nepal ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Nepal and Sudan?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Nepal and Sudan rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Nepal ranks 160th 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.