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

Austria
84.97
in 2014
Jordan
84.61
in 2014
Austria rank
70th
Jordan rank
73rd

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

  • Austria
  • Jordan
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Austria currently reports 84.97 against 84.61 in Jordan, a difference of 0.36.

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

Austria ranks 70th and Jordan ranks 73rd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Austria Jordan Difference Ahead
2000s 86.06 73.91 12.14 Austria
2010s 84.8 80.69 4.11 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 met, Austria or Jordan?
Austria, at 84.97 against 84.61 in Jordan as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Austria and Jordan?
0.36, with Austria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Austria and Jordan?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Austria and Jordan rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Austria ranks 70th and Jordan ranks 73rd 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.