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

Belarus
66.32
in 2014
Paraguay
66.14
in 2014
Belarus rank
141st
Paraguay rank
143rd

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

  • Belarus
  • Paraguay
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Belarus currently reports 66.32 against 66.14 in Paraguay, a difference of 0.18.

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

Belarus ranks 141st and Paraguay ranks 143rd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Belarus Paraguay Difference Ahead
2000s 0 66.24 66.24 Paraguay
2010s 29.5 68.87 39.37 Paraguay

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, Belarus or Paraguay?
Belarus, at 66.32 against 66.14 in Paraguay as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Belarus and Paraguay?
0.18, with Belarus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Paraguay?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Belarus and Paraguay rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Belarus ranks 141st and Paraguay ranks 143rd 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.