Bulgaria vs Papua New Guinea: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Bulgaria
82.3
in 2014
Papua New Guinea
82.57
in 2014
Bulgaria rank
87th
Papua New Guinea rank
84th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Bulgaria
- Papua New Guinea
How they compare
Papua New Guinea currently reports 82.57 against 82.3 in Bulgaria, a difference of 0.27.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Papua New Guinea has been ahead every year.
Bulgaria ranks 87th and Papua New Guinea ranks 84th of 184 countries.
Papua New Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bulgaria | Papua New Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 74.27 | 81.65 | 7.38 | Papua New Guinea |
| 2010s | 78.99 | 83.77 | 4.78 | Papua New Guinea |
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), Bulgaria or Papua New Guinea?
- Papua New Guinea, at 82.57 against 82.3 in Bulgaria as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Bulgaria and Papua New Guinea?
- 0.27, with Papua New Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bulgaria and Papua New Guinea?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Bulgaria and Papua New Guinea rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Bulgaria ranks 87th and Papua New Guinea ranks 84th 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.