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

Austria
84.97
in 2014
Togo
85.41
in 2014
Austria rank
70th
Togo rank
67th

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

  • Austria
  • Togo
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Togo currently reports 85.41 against 84.97 in Austria, a difference of 0.44.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Austria ahead.

Austria ranks 70th and Togo ranks 67th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Austria Togo Difference Ahead
2000s 86.06 81.42 4.63 Austria
2010s 84.8 84.29 0.5087 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 Togo?
Togo, at 85.41 against 84.97 in Austria as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Austria and Togo?
0.44, with Togo ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Austria and Togo?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Austria and Togo rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Austria ranks 70th and Togo ranks 67th 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.