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

Rwanda
38.24
in 2014
Uganda
47.93
in 2014
Rwanda rank
166th
Uganda rank
163rd

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

  • Rwanda
  • Uganda
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Uganda currently reports 47.93 against 38.24 in Rwanda, a difference of 9.69.

That makes Uganda's figure about 1.3 times Rwanda's.

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

Rwanda ranks 166th and Uganda ranks 163rd of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Rwanda averaged higher in 1 and Uganda in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Rwanda Uganda Difference Ahead
2000s 25.06 25.41 0.3487 Uganda
2010s 51.41 31.35 20.06 Rwanda

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, Rwanda or Uganda?
Uganda, at 47.93 against 38.24 in Rwanda as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me between Rwanda and Uganda?
9.69, with Uganda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Uganda?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Rwanda and Uganda rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15 me?
Rwanda ranks 166th and Uganda ranks 163rd 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.