Afghanistan vs Mali: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Afghanistan
5.68
in 2014
Mali
25.93
in 2014
Afghanistan rank
175th
Mali rank
172nd
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Afghanistan
- Mali
How they compare
Mali currently reports 25.93 against 5.68 in Afghanistan, a difference of 20.25.
That makes Mali's figure about 4.6 times Afghanistan's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Mali ahead.
Afghanistan ranks 175th and Mali ranks 172nd of 183 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Afghanistan averaged higher in 1 and Mali in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Afghanistan | Mali | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 39.33 | 36.14 | 3.19 | Afghanistan |
| 2010s | 16.6 | 35.87 | 19.27 | Mali |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15), Afghanistan or Mali?
- Mali, at 25.93 against 5.68 in Afghanistan as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Afghanistan and Mali?
- 20.25, with Mali ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Afghanistan and Mali?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Afghanistan and Mali rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Afghanistan ranks 175th and Mali ranks 172nd of 183 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to import (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 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 DB06-15 studies.