Bolivia, Plurinational State of vs Switzerland: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD)
Bolivia, Plurinational State of
95.71
in 2019
Switzerland
96.14
in 2019
Bolivia, Plurinational State of rank
35th
Switzerland rank
34th
Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) over time
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of
- Switzerland
How they compare
Switzerland currently reports 96.14 against 95.71 in Bolivia, Plurinational State of, a difference of 0.43.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Switzerland has been ahead every year.
Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 35th and Switzerland ranks 34th of 190 countries.
Switzerland has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd), Bolivia, Plurinational State of or Switzerland?
- Switzerland, at 96.14 against 95.71 in Bolivia, Plurinational State of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) between Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Switzerland?
- 0.43, with Switzerland ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Switzerland?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Bolivia, Plurinational State of and Switzerland rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd)?
- Bolivia, Plurinational State of ranks 35th and Switzerland ranks 34th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 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 for documentary compliance to import 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 DB16-20 studies.