Puerto Rico vs Saudi Arabia: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Puerto Rico
80.61
in 2014
Saudi Arabia
80.94
in 2014
Puerto Rico rank
102nd
Saudi Arabia rank
100th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Puerto Rico
- Saudi Arabia
How they compare
Saudi Arabia currently reports 80.94 against 80.61 in Puerto Rico, a difference of 0.33.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Saudi Arabia has been ahead every year.
Puerto Rico ranks 102nd and Saudi Arabia ranks 100th of 183 countries.
Saudi Arabia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Puerto Rico | Saudi Arabia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 75.27 | 88.03 | 12.76 | Saudi Arabia |
| 2010s | 80.1 | 86.12 | 6.02 | Saudi Arabia |
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), Puerto Rico or Saudi Arabia?
- Saudi Arabia, at 80.94 against 80.61 in Puerto Rico as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Puerto Rico and Saudi Arabia?
- 0.33, with Saudi Arabia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Puerto Rico and Saudi Arabia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Puerto Rico and Saudi Arabia rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Puerto Rico ranks 102nd and Saudi Arabia ranks 100th 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.