Angola vs Malawi: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met

Angola
58.15
in 2014
Malawi
55.14
in 2014
Angola rank
156th
Malawi rank
157th

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

  • Angola
  • Malawi
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Angola currently reports 58.15 against 55.14 in Malawi, a difference of 3.01.

That makes Angola's figure about 1.1 times Malawi's.

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

Angola ranks 156th and Malawi ranks 157th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Angola Malawi Difference Ahead
2000s 20.13 3.91 16.22 Angola
2010s 46 38.14 7.86 Angola

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 met, Angola or Malawi?
Angola, at 58.15 against 55.14 in Malawi as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Angola and Malawi?
3.01, with Angola ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Malawi?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Angola and Malawi rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Angola ranks 156th and Malawi ranks 157th of 181 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

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to import (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 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.