Austria vs Bosnia and Herzegovina: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Austria
84.97
in 2014
Bosnia and Herzegovina
85.23
in 2014
Austria rank
71st
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
70th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Austria
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 85.23 against 84.97 in Austria, a difference of 0.26.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Austria ahead.
Austria ranks 71st and Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 70th of 184 countries.
Austria has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Austria | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 86.06 | 83.1 | 2.95 | Austria |
| 2010s | 84.8 | 84.51 | 0.295 | Austria |
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), Austria or Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 85.23 against 84.97 in Austria as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Austria and Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- 0.26, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Austria and Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Austria and Bosnia and Herzegovina rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Austria ranks 71st and Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 70th of 184 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.