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

Belgium
81.68
in 2014
Spain
81.68
in 2014
Belgium rank
89th
Spain rank
89th

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

  • Belgium
  • Spain
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Belgium currently reports 81.68 against 81.68 in Spain, a difference of 0.

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

Belgium ranks 89th and Spain ranks 89th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Belgium Spain Difference Ahead
2000s 78.16 83.76 5.6 Spain
2010s 80.75 82.26 1.51 Spain

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, Belgium or Spain?
Belgium, at 81.68 against 81.68 in Spain as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Belgium and Spain?
0, with Belgium ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Spain?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Belgium and Spain rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Belgium ranks 89th and Spain ranks 89th 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.