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

Canada
76.71
in 2014
Iceland
77.78
in 2014
Canada rank
122nd
Iceland rank
120th

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

  • Canada
  • Iceland
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 77.78 against 76.71 in Canada, a difference of 1.07.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Canada ahead.

Canada ranks 122nd and Iceland ranks 120th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Canada Iceland Difference Ahead
2000s 75.33 70.6 4.73 Canada
2010s 76.19 75.61 0.5822 Canada

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, Canada or Iceland?
Iceland, at 77.78 against 76.71 in Canada as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Canada and Iceland?
1.07, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Canada and Iceland?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Canada and Iceland rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Canada ranks 122nd and Iceland ranks 120th 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.